Cloud image use cases

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Haïkel <hguemar at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> 2015-07-10 13:59 GMT+02:00 Josh Boyer <jwboyer at fedoraproject.org>:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I was hoping someone could clarify the use cases for the cloud image,
>> particularly in light of the reductions being looked at (like removing
>> python).  I ask because I honestly don't know what purpose the cloud
>> image is serving any longer.
>>
>
> That's a trade-off
> * minimize disk usage that comes with a cost on IaaS platforms.
> * minimize attack surface by removing unnecessary components
> * base image is a generic one, not everyone needs a python interpreter
> especially when you deploy a java or ruby apps.
> * cloud instances provides tooling to customize images at startup
> (cloud-init in
> our case)
> * you can save a customized image to be reused on most IaaS platforms.
> * Patterns of deployment in the cloud are based on the assumptions of full
> automation and minimal human interventions.
>
> In my own opinion, base image is a neutral base and one has to customize
> it for their use. We provide the tooling and a suitable base and it's a much
> harder task to minimize fedora than adding missing tools.

OK.  So your answer to my immediate question is "neutral base that
people have to customize".  Fair enough.  Now, why would someone wish
to choose a Fedora cloud image over Ubuntu or CoreOS or any of the
other "minimal base that you have to customize" images?

> And that's again, my own opinion, but the day we will provide an easy way to
> generate customize/upload in IaaS cloud images for end-users (maybe through
> copr), the cloud
> story will be complete. Suse has done an awesome job in that direction
> through
> kiwi.

They've done that with kiwi for a long time.  They've had JeOS around
for a long time.  Which is kind of my follow up point.  Why would
someone choose Fedora cloud?  What makes it compelling?

>> The atomic image is squarely targeted at being small, and for running
>> containers.  It is somewhat positioned as a CoreOS solution.  With
>> that being the case, I'm curious how the cloud image is different and
>> not a repetitive image simply not using the atomic mechanisms.
>>
>
> One could see the current cloud image as a transitional step between
> the opinionated approach from Atomic Host and classical linux distro.

Or, in other words, a minimal linux distro that you download and then
have to spend time customizing :).

> Atomic Host concept goes further than just CoreOS, as it could become
> the next way to envision linux distro including the desktop.

Yes, I'm aware that Atomic technology is broader than just cloud.

> Cloud images are the current production, Atomic Host is the Research lab of
> the
> cloud SIG.

That is somewhat confusing.  For the F22 release, I heard much more
chatter and excitement around Atomic than I did Cloud images.  To the
point where I thought the Atomic image _was_ the cloud image for a
very long time.  Hence my follow up now.

josh