Whether something makes sense is subjective.
But as to your 2nd point. One word: Reproducibility. I am in the big data genomics community where an experiment that can't be verified by a 2nd party is a bad experiment. Like everywhere in science. VMs are a great way to provide that reproducibility. I understand the security argument to some degree but we're not all noobs. We can make our own conscious choice as to under what conditions it is safe to run an EOLed VM without security updates. For example, within a VPC or a under tightly controlled security group (firewall policy).
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:37 AM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 02/03/2016 09:24 AM, Hannes Schmidt wrote:
>
> So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it?
> Makes no sense to me.
It's no longer receiving updates, so that does actually make sense.
Can you describe the use case for an EOL release that might persuade us
that we should continue paying for the storage required to host EOL AMIs
and risking that users might deploy them without realizing they are no
longer receiving security updates?
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
jzb@xxxxxxxxxx | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list
cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hannes Schmidt
Software Engineer
Center for Biomolecular Science and Engineering
Center for Biomolecular Science and Engineering
_______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
