Karen Tung wrote:
> Keith Mitchell wrote:
>>>
>>> In my opinion, the text installer should:
>>>
>>> - work on both x86 and sparc
>>> - offer a similar installation experience and feature set as the 
>>> existing slim GUI installer
>> Should it offer a similar installation experience? What does this 
>> mean? Is the target audience for the text installer the same as the 
>> target audience for the GUI installer (I would say that it's not). In 
>> that case, the experience - and feature set - should be tailored to 
>> the text installer's anticipated user base.
> For me, a "similar installation experience" means similar questions 
> will be asked.  Same things
> can be configured/selected during installation.  Not more, not less.
Is there an implicit assumption about what type of an install this going 
to be - media or network  ?  For  a network based install, will there be 
a need to ask further questions ? Like ability to choose the repo and 
mirror ?


-Sanjay

>
> I agree that the text installer's anticipated user base should be 
> considered.  So, let's talk about that.
> From what I can see, users that can benefit from using the text 
> installer are:
>
> - all sparc users, since AI  is the only way to install SPARC machine 
> at this time.
> - All x86 users who can not use the GUI installer now, because their 
> machine doesn't have enough
> memory to run GNOME, or because their machine can't use the window 
> system..etc..
>
> Based on the above user groups, I don't see why we need a different 
> feature set for
> the text installer.  Offering the same feature set would provide the 
> same installation experience,
> and we can re-use a lot of existing code.
>
>>> - the installation performance shouldn't defer too much from the GUI 
>>> installer.  (ie: if it
>>> takes 20 minutes to install via GUI, it should take about the same 
>>> amount of time to install
>>> via the text installer)
>> Can we define "same amount of time"? Would that be within 10%? No 
>> more than twice as long? Does installation time include the time the 
>> user spends selecting options, or just the time spent moving bits?
> I guess this point is kinda covered in the "user experience" point 
> above.  I think the questions to be
> answered should be similar and the amount of time spent on moving bits 
> should be similar.
> This is assuming we provide the same feature set for both installers.  
> If they have different feature
> sets, probably doesn't make sense to impose this requirement.
>
> --Karen
>
> _______________________________________________
> caiman-discuss mailing list
> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss


Reply via email to