Size limits for images in xenial and beyond?

[Tim]

Hi Steve,
   Ubuntu GNOME decided a while back that our hard size limit would be to fit on a 2GB usb stick, and just aim internally not to unnecessarily
bloat the images. We just never got around to getting the limits officially bumped up.

I don't think we need to be subscribed to oversize emails, the oversized warnings are displayed in enough places, that it would be hard to miss.

Thanks
  Tim

On 02/05/16 10:35, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It's been several years now since the last time the Ubuntu desktop fit on a
> CD and we raised the limit for oversized images.  However, while we had a
> roadmap for a few cycles for how to raise the limit gradually to keep
> healthy pressure in place, we've gone past the end of that and daily images
> have been reporting as "oversized" for quite a while now.
>
> This generates daily emails to members of the release team and cdimage team,
> which then basically are seeing no follow-up because we know nobody cares
> about these limits but no one has set new ones.
>
> I've finally gone ahead and bumped the limit on Ubuntu desktop images,
> shortly before xenial release, to 2GB for a minimally-sized USB stick; this
> gives us a new limit that I think we will care about, while also leaving us
> headroom so we're not constantly fighting it back down to the line (current
> images are ~1.4GB).
>
> But Ubuntu Desktop is not the only image that's oversized according to the
> stated limits - there are lots of others (see attached mail).  As all of
> these images have been released with 16.04, it's clear that these limits
> aren't important to the owners of those products either.
>
> Can I ask flavor leads to please reply to this email and answer two
> questions:
>
>   - What should the size limit be for your images, for 16.04 and later?
>   - Do you want to be subscribed to the email notifications of oversized
>     images - and if so, what address?
>
> For maintainability purposes, it would be helpful if we didn't have too many
> different per-flavor image limits.  I'd recommend using one of the limits
> already present in our checks:
>
>   850MB
>   950MB
>   1GiB (not GB - technically this means it doesn't fit on a 1GB USB stick,
>     but who has 1GB USB sticks anymore?)
>   1224MiB (? should probably be made 1.2GiB...)
>   1.46GB (mini DVD)
>   2GB (== 2GB USB stick)
>   DVD (4590208KiB)
>
> OTOH those are some pretty big jumps in between, so if a flavor wanted to
> scale in, say, 100MB or 200MB increments, that would probably be ok... but
> please, let's not keep mixing MiB and MB everywhere :)
>
> Thanks,
>
>