-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/03/2014 09:16 AM, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 03/03/2014 04:06 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Gallagher >> <sgall...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> On 03/03/2014 08:51 AM, Ric Wheeler wrote: >>>> On 03/03/2014 03:43 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >>>>> So if you were asking me "Are we removing btrfs from the >>>>> install options completely?", the answer is a resounding >>>>> "NO". However, if you're asking "Are we removing btrfs from >>>>> the drop-down of simple-install layouts?", my personal >>>>> recommendation is "yes". >>>> I disagree - why would we remove the drop down option? >>>> >>>> That would make it exceedingly hard and rare for casual users >>>> to install and test. Basically, our Fedora btrfs user base >>>> would drop to nothing. >>>> >>>> Making it easy to test is a critical part of taking btrfs up >>>> to the next level of stability! >>>> >>> >>> It's a matter of user experience, here. By presenting something >>> in the guided drop-down, we are effectively asserting that they >>> are of equal utility and support. This is *not* the reality. >>> >>> Now, if you want to talk about having some sort of >>> click-through for "I want to try out some experimental options >>> without going all the way to customizing my layout manually", >>> that (to me) needs to be a different, third path. But listing >>> it directly alongside the default gives a false expectation. >>> >>> Now, this might be as simple as changing the modern drop-down >>> from * EXT4 * BTRFS * XFS [] Use LVM >>> >>> To something like: * XFS-LVM (Recommended) * XFS * EXT4-LVM * >>> EXT4 * BTRFS (Experimental) >>> >>> But even still, Fedora QA is at least ostensibly supposed to >>> test all guided paths and best-effort of custom paths. This is >>> more paths than are strictly necessary, especially considering >>> that we don't expect many people to actually USE the guided >>> paths (in favor of custom and/or kickstart). >> Ok I was just confused as I haven't done a normal install in a >> few releases. So you can still get to btrfs going through some >> new "custom layout" option but you want to remove the "install >> onto btrfs" easy button in the normal guided option? I'm ok with >> this, I just want to make sure that I/users don't have to jump >> through icantbelieveitsnotbtr hoops to install onto btrfs. >> Thanks, >> >> Josef > > I am fine with something like what is proposed by Steve above - > let users have the GUI present an option that gives preference to > the default without totally hiding other options. >
To be clear, I don't really like that option at all. I was presenting it to show how it's not a great user experience. That being said, if everyone else (and especially QA) prefers that approach, I'm certainly flexible on the point. I'm really hoping that the design, user experience, anaconda and QA teams will make their opinions on this known. I know full well that this is not my area of expertise. BCCing a few specific individuals to hopefully get their input. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlMUkD0ACgkQeiVVYja6o6Pi+ACfTDwoz8EHV5eztXwIOVz4IBBh JZIAoIWD+NnTHfS6PrIDi+t0eeMVyP5h =+v+e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
