Comment 3 for bug 1415634

So after some discussion, it seems that what we have is not entirely unreasonable.
There would/could be some gain (possbly on the order of 70-80M in /lib/modules). That includes removal of wireless modules, graphics drivers, sound, and some other misc drivers. I'll attach my revised list.

So there is definitely some space to gain from a -server image, however that comes at a development and recurring maintenance cost.
Below the 2 images are "cloud" and "maas", but can be considered "virtual server" and "physical server" for all practical purposes.

The options then are:
a.) keep things as they are, having 2 images for download. Essentially a "ubuntu server + -virtual kernel" for virtual environments and a "ubuntu server + -generic kernel" for hardware.
b.) add new '-server' flavor, and reduce those 2 images to 1. This incurs cost of additional size for virtual users.
c.) add existing -generic flavor everywhere.

It seems that we have 2 different things for good reason. The drivers that are unnecessary in a virtual environment total to be quite large. I think the best thing to do at the omemnt is keep the status-quo (a) and reduce other differences to the 2 images.

We will reduce the delta so that the 2 are really the same other than "hardware enablement" packages (kernel , grub/uefi ... ) and document that cleanly.