|
On 10/10/2013 08:07 AM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
I would assume not if we stick to the "GA tree" but more to the point why exactly does the installation image have to be made from the tree it's composing from?Well, for a start, if it isn't, we're effectively back to the old situation that we hated, where we have *two* network management code bases to support, *two* initrd frameworks to support, etc etc etc. For each release we'd have the 'live one', and the old 'stable' one that anaconda was based on. Restating what has been previously mentioned does not help anything and comparing the rewrite of Anaconda to the old code base neither. We need to identify which of the components Anaconda ( still ) uses that prevent Anaconda from being developed in it's own release cycle. Like for example which "features" of dracut/systemd/network manager it's using ( I thought the rewrite move to standalone tools and libraries ( blivet to handle storage,pykistart etc ) would have made this easier not harder ) in any case once those components have been identified we can check those components for api changes and their changelog for anything else to better see how invasive their changes are JBG |
_______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
