On Fri, 2015-11-06 at 13:17 +0100, Vojtěch Trefný wrote: > > On 5.11.2015 18:11, Brian C. Lane wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 04:59:07PM +0100, Martin Kolman wrote: > > > > Visiting a spoke isn't the same as changing something. I think we > > should > > base this on changes, shouldn't we? > > > > But if you visit a spoke without changing something, it means the > defaults are ok for you and you're probably not going to change them > later. > > Maybe we could put both "visited" and "changed" to the file and let > Initial Setup (and other) decide. I have discussed something similar with Jiri - basically, we already have some add-hock checking if the user changed something in the spokes, used mostly to decide if we need to re-run some expensive refresh operation or potentially not if the user did not change anything. The idea was that this could be formalized, potentially as a form of say a "spoke access manager/monitor" that would keep track of what spokes were entered and potentially changed. The data could be then used both at runtime (so Anaconda can check for changes on a spoke in consistent manner) and could be dumped to the config file at the end of installation. > > _______________________________________________ > Anaconda-devel-list mailing list > Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
