On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 08:26:49PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 08/04/2014 07:00 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 01:12:19PM +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: > >> On 08/01/2014 10:04 PM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > > Considering the fact that there are (at least some) drawbacks to using AMP marketplace I guess it > > would be nice to know what the benefits are? If we can lay it all out on the table then perhaps we > > can understand why one choice is made over the other. > > lower barrier to entry, access to wider resources at AWS, and being the > recommended delivery format by AWS folks... Also, the general thinking > is that folks who know what they are doing are going to byoi anyway, its > the ones that done we want to help with the AMP. BYOI. Yes that is typically the case. With cloud-init, however, I think people (at least the ones who know about it) will try to use an off-the-shelf image and just configure it on bringup using cloud-init. That way they don't have to manage their own images but simply the cloud-init configuration. > > Also, traditionally, we've never done anything that would be a one way > vendor endorsement, AMP was a way for amazon to acknowledge we exist. > > The plan here is to deliver AMP images, and also .raw backing files with > manifests that allow people to either s3 or ebs inject their own images. > I can easily complement that with a public shared image set as well ( we > might need that in some AZ's regardless ). But we'd need to workout some > way to work around cost of doing this. Were looking at a couple of > hundred USD a month. > This would be great! The flexibility of the public image is very desirable. I don't think it would be too hard for people to find if we had a page similar to the one Fedora has [1]. Thanks, Dusty [1] http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora#clouds