On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Adam Williamson
It is entirely possible, of course, to be 'greatly improved'
'excessive'. You didn't argue that the installer is too buggy, you
argued that it hasn't got any less buggy ('stability or blocker bugs')
since Fedora 17. So now you're completely changing your premise.
You might be correct. AcceptedBlocker for anaconda+python-blivet
Fedora 25 = 9
Fedora 24 = 5
Fedora 23 = 23
Fedora 22 = 20
Feodra 21 = 19
Fedora 20 = 42
Still, we've been round this goat rodeo many times, and I know
perfectly well why anaconda is susceptible to bugs: because it does a
lot of stuff. Have you considered how many bugs you'd find if you only
tested the same things in anaconda that you can actually *do at all* in
YaST does pretty much all the things Anaconda can do. It has a mind
numbing interface that requires contortions to get through. But
there's almost zero complaints about the installer in suseland. It is
widely trusted. I also haven't run into data loss bugs in it while
actively trying to hit them.
> OK well the most obvious would be the four installer UIs in 5 years,
> should blivet-gui get integrated in Fedora 26. The old bottom UI is
> dumped (1), and replaced with automatic partitioning (2) and custom's
> top down UI (3). Then the idea becomes the top down UI isn't doing
> what users want so add a new bottom up UI (4).
Uh, that's some strange counting you've got there, bub. Your '1',
and '3' are actually all the same single change: newUI. And oldUI still
effectively had a 'guided workflow' and a 'custom workflow'; they were
just presented slightly differently (linearly).
I'm not counting change sets. I'm counting user distinguishable UIs,
and those are four distinctly different interfaces and experiences and
they each even have their own names:
That is a lot of churn in UI/Ux in 5 years. And I've already gone on
to disagree with the including of the 4th one in the installer proper,
it just makes it all the more unwieldy. How many UI's does an
installer need jokes forthcoming.