On 11/08/2012 10:09 PM, David Lehman wrote:
On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 21:45 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 11/08/2012 09:36 PM, Chris Lumens wrote:
No, this is absolutely not the direction we will be moving in.
So which direction do you want to take the installer so we can easily
revert it should it become necessary or if the project would like to
release updated GA release with an updated installer?
Below is my take. I'm not management, so technically that's all it is.
We already have a focus for current and immediate-future development.
Discussions are fine, but your expectations should be set that we're not
about to change directions now.
I would just be satisfied getting the "final picture" and how it's
planned for the installer being able to revert should it become
necessary for a release which this development cycle has most certainly
proved that it is necessary,
Surely the best method ( and the least effort ) would be to maintain the
same installer for all releases ( GA+Branched+Rawhide ) so what
different command code template being used based on "detect" release
being installed?
We've just been discussing how much work it is to maintain the installer
for one branch. Doing so for three branches sounds like 250% the work of
doing it for one.
Depends on the implementation how much additional load that would be but
yes it would be more then just being able to maintain a single release
which is used only "once" per release cycle as opposed to single
released used across all releases
What has been discussed, thrown out there to solve this/these problems?
Fewer branches? Fewer install methods? Fewer install-time configurables?
less churn, fewer things to maintain,fewer things that can go wrong (
which is good )
JBG
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
