different delivery formats

[Adam Young]

On 02/13/2012 05:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:55:26AM +0100, Alan Pevec wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
>> <berrange at redhat.com>  wrote:
>>> I have a hard time accepting the argument that cloud disk images would
>>> be too big for mirrors. We're talking 100-200 MB per disk image typical.
>>> Even if we provided 3 formats, in two architectures we'd almost certainly
>>> be less than 1 GB in total size.
>>>
>>> Now look at Fedora 16 updates directory - 12 GB for x86_64, 12 GB for
>>> i386, and 9 GB for SRPMs.  So that's 33 GB of RPMs for Updates alone.
>>> Now the base release was another 73 GB. So for just RPMs, for 1 release
>>> of Fedora we're talking 100 GB.
>>>
>>> Our cloud images would be a mere 1% of the total Fedora size mirrors
>>> have to carry per release.
>> Do we care update updates i.e. update the image every time any package
>> inside gets updated ?
>> By looking at timestamps, Ubuntu's images[1] seem to be updated rather
>> frequently.
> Hmm, yes, they do seem to get periodic updates, though not on a time
> based schedule. I wonder what criteria they use for doing updated
> images.

Could we just post the current image per major release and maybe hold on 
to the two or three previous images to make sure there is something 
available incase things get broken?  Then the amount of disk space 
required stays constant,  and we don't have people permanently linking 
to something with a known security hole in it.

>
>
> Daniel