On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:14 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 20, 2014, at 2:28 PM, Adam Williamson
<awilliam(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> You might need to provide more details and background in posts like
> this, Chris, considering the context. I don't think the desktop team is
> as familiar with the ins and outs of installer partitioning as the
> anaconda and QA teams. They don't deal with it every day. :)
OK I'm not sure how or what to provide that wouldn't also be obscenely verbose.
My premise is that the present installer paths (Automatic and Manual)
do not constitute limiting the user interaction to the minimum. But
maybe all or most WG members consider the installer already meets
these requirements?
For comparison, by at least two orders of magnitude, the Windows and
OS X installers are more minimalist. They each offer a handful of
installed outcomes (including dual boot), whereas Anaconda
Automatic/guided path alone offers dozens of outcomes, and the
Manual/custom paths offers hundreds possibly infinite.
It would help for this audience to quantify exactly what 'automatic' and
'manual' *are*, and the range of choices they currently expose.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net