Dne 09. 02. 24 v 18:27 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
I think we should leave "GA" images. Even thought they are
EOL for the
most part, I think it's still possibly nice to be able to spin one up to
test something or the like. We can find the names on our download
server, ie,
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/35/Cloud/x...
Fedora-Cloud-Base-35-1.2 is the GA for fedora 35 cloud.
Nod. I was about to ask how can I find them... but the name match nicely. And going
manualy over 35 names is likely not
big deal.
I will tag them. Then they disappear from my radar.
I propose tag
FedoraGroup=ga-archives
Any objections?
We should exclude all 'current' releases (ie, 38/39/40)
*nod*
We should exclude "Rawhide" ones that are 2024? I don't
think we need to
keep all the old ones there. We have them koji if we really need them.
(At least the last month or two)
*nod*
I am unsure about the CentOS ones. We should check with them on that.
I want to put CentOS aside for now. There is "only" 2k out of 145k that
are related to centos. We can work on them in a
later step.
Would it be worth it to rename the ones we plan to delete with a
'about
to delete' name, wait a while and then delete? Or is there any way to
tell who/how many people are using a ami?
All operation are reference to AMI are using ami-id. If I change name, likely no one will
a notice.
But I can do what I did with volumes - first tag it with FedoraGroup=garbage-collector and
only then delete it. This can
lower the human error on my side.
I can rename too. That will be no problem for me, but I would not bet on that somebody
notice of diferent name.
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys