A new update of Fedora Cloud Atomic Host has been released and can be downloaded at:
https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html
Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud-Images/x86_64/Imag... https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud_Atomic/x86_64/iso/...
Thank you, Fedora Release Engineering
On 12/15/2015 05:20 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
A new update of Fedora Cloud Atomic Host has been released and can be downloaded at:
https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html
Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud-Images/x86_64/Imag... https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud_Atomic/x86_64/iso/...
I have updated the vagrant boxes in atlas so now they reflect the latest.
https://atlas.hashicorp.com/fedora/boxes/23-atomic-host
I have a few questions:
1 - Why did the url change from https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/ to https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable
2 - Can we not overwrite the previous download location with the new one? I'd prefer for there to be sub directories for each release.
In each "version" in atlas that I put out I link to the actual images for that version. If we overwrite the location and delete the old images then those links get broken.
Thanks, Dusty
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
On 12/15/2015 05:20 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
A new update of Fedora Cloud Atomic Host has been released and can be downloaded at:
https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html
Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud-Images/x86_64/Imag... https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud_Atomic/x86_64/iso/...
I have updated the vagrant boxes in atlas so now they reflect the latest.
https://atlas.hashicorp.com/fedora/boxes/23-atomic-host
I have a few questions:
1 - Why did the url change from https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/ to https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable
I'm honestly not sure, that was a decision from the Infra Team and I can't remember the motivation behind it.
2 - Can we not overwrite the previous download location with the new one? I'd prefer for there to be sub directories for each release.
I might be reading this wrong but this sounds like two different things. You'd like the same location overwritten *and* different subdirectories populated for each release?
In each "version" in atlas that I put out I link to the actual images for that version. If we overwrite the location and delete the old images then those links get broken.
Thanks, Dusty _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 12/22/2015 10:41 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
On 12/15/2015 05:20 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
A new update of Fedora Cloud Atomic Host has been released and can be downloaded at:
https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html
Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud-Images/x86_64/Imag... https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud_Atomic/x86_64/iso/...
I have updated the vagrant boxes in atlas so now they reflect the latest.
https://atlas.hashicorp.com/fedora/boxes/23-atomic-host
I have a few questions:
1 - Why did the url change from https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/ to https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable
I'm honestly not sure, that was a decision from the Infra Team and I can't remember the motivation behind it.
I'd prefer that it remain download.fedoraproject.org.. matches our other released deliverables.
2 - Can we not overwrite the previous download location with the new one? I'd prefer for there to be sub directories for each release.
I might be reading this wrong but this sounds like two different things. You'd like the same location overwritten *and* different subdirectories populated for each release?
No, I definitely don't want the same location overwritten. I'd prefer to use subdirectories of /stable/ and then update the download links on the release page to point to the latest one when we do a release.
The subdirs would look something like what we have now under /testing [1].
- Dusty
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
On 12/22/2015 10:41 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
On 12/15/2015 05:20 PM, Adam Miller wrote:
A new update of Fedora Cloud Atomic Host has been released and can be downloaded at:
https://getfedora.org/en/cloud/download/atomic.html
Respective signed CHECKSUM files can be found here: https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud-Images/x86_64/Imag... https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/Cloud_Atomic/x86_64/iso/...
I have updated the vagrant boxes in atlas so now they reflect the latest.
https://atlas.hashicorp.com/fedora/boxes/23-atomic-host
I have a few questions:
1 - Why did the url change from https://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable/ to https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/stable
I'm honestly not sure, that was a decision from the Infra Team and I can't remember the motivation behind it.
I'd prefer that it remain download.fedoraproject.org.. matches our other released deliverables.
2 - Can we not overwrite the previous download location with the new one? I'd prefer for there to be sub directories for each release.
I might be reading this wrong but this sounds like two different things. You'd like the same location overwritten *and* different subdirectories populated for each release?
No, I definitely don't want the same location overwritten. I'd prefer to use subdirectories of /stable/ and then update the download links on the release page to point to the latest one when we do a release.
It was originally requested from the upstream project atomic team to just have the stable location be overwritten in-place (which is what happens now) so that the latest is what is there. We keep old test composes around but trim off the tail end for storage conservation because they need to persist for at least a two-week release cycle.
I don't have any real preference as long as we have a policy to ensure we aren't just collecting data forever. However, I don't have a lot of motivation to keep older versions laying around when the point of the Two-Week Atomic is to deliver newer bits more rapidly than Fedora has traditionally.
I am curious what the motivation behind wanting old releases around is.
I'd also be curious if mmcgrath and/or jzb have an opinion on the topic.
-AdamM
The subdirs would look something like what we have now under /testing [1].
- Dusty
[1] - https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/atomic/testing/ _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 12/22/2015 11:18 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
On 12/22/2015 10:41 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
2 - Can we not overwrite the previous download location with the new one? I'd prefer for there to be sub directories for each release.
I might be reading this wrong but this sounds like two different things. You'd like the same location overwritten *and* different subdirectories populated for each release?
No, I definitely don't want the same location overwritten. I'd prefer to use subdirectories of /stable/ and then update the download links on the release page to point to the latest one when we do a release.
It was originally requested from the upstream project atomic team to just have the stable location be overwritten in-place (which is what happens now) so that the latest is what is there. We keep old test composes around but trim off the tail end for storage conservation because they need to persist for at least a two-week release cycle.
I don't have any real preference as long as we have a policy to ensure we aren't just collecting data forever. However, I don't have a lot of motivation to keep older versions laying around when the point of the Two-Week Atomic is to deliver newer bits more rapidly than Fedora has traditionally.
Not wanting to keep them around forever is reasonable, but I'd say for a particular release it would be fine to keep the 2-week-atomic released images available for the duration of that release.
I am curious what the motivation behind wanting old releases around is.
Various reasons. If we just found a critical bug in the last released Atomic it would be nice to easily go back. If we overwrite the download location then that is a lot harder to do.
Some people also like sticking to a baseline. so they may choose the atomic host that was released every month and not every two weeks. So if we overwrite the download location, after two weeks their download link is broken. They can still get "back" using `ostree deploy`, but that is a pain in the ass in a cloud environment where you should be just booting what you want rather than having to "boot, deploy, reboot".
I'd also be curious if mmcgrath and/or jzb have an opinion on the topic.
Me too.