On Sat, 2014-03-01 at 12:56 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Feb 28, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 08:05:34PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> Others have pointed out that the RHEL7 client uses XFS already. I'm > >> of the opinion that ext4 vs. XFS is pretty comparable for most cases, > >> so I have no strong objections either way. > > > > I'd really like to have the discussion about whether btrfs is still a > > medium-term goal. > > I don't think a broader conversation on Btrfs is in scope for the Workstation tech spec. What I think is relevant right now, is whether there should still be a Btrfs guided partitioning option, which is what we currently have in Fedora 20 and older. Or if there shall only be the default. > > It's curiously ostensible to say we'll use Btrfs when it's ready in maybe a year, but then drop it as an alternate easy install option. I also think it's appropriate to label it in the pop-up with "Preview" or "Work in Progress". > > I propose for automatic/guided partitioning: > > Server: > Default=LVM with XFS > Alternate = none > > Workstation: > Default= Standard Partitioning (ext4) > Alternate = Btrfs – Preview So now we have three guided paths to test, which is barely an improvement on four? I thought we had previously agreed that we wanted to cut these down as far as possible. :( -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
