On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Vratislav Podzimek <vpodzime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 10:33 +0100, drago01 wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Vratislav Podzimek >> <vpodzime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 19:32 +0100, Gianluca Sforna wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > I'd recommend asking dcantrell, as he has some good points on this >> >> > topic. I broadly agree with him that it might well be more or less >> >> > impossible to smoothly handle a major rewrite of anaconda in our current >> >> > development process. CCing to make sure he sees this. >> >> >> >> If you are saying that 6 months are a too short time for something >> >> like this I think I can understand it. >> > 6 months are a too short time. And it was less than 6 months. As can be >> > seen from the F18 release schedule [1], originally it was about 3 months >> > between the day F17 was released and the day new Anaconda was expected >> > to work (F18 Alpha release). >> >> Sure in that case you shouldn't have propose it for F18 to begin with >> but take your time and introduce it in F19. There is no need for this >> rush. > I don't see any advantage in that, because it would end up the same as > with F17 and F18. We don't do only changes we want to do and we come up > with. As many other packages change these changes have to be reflected > in Anaconda [1]. And that's the work that has to be done no matter we > want/need to focus on the redesign/rewrite or not. Not buying that .... anaconda is not the only package that interacts with others. You can have a newui branch where you rewrite things (you could also provide images for people to test) while having the working version in a stable branch, Once newui is feature complete it can be moved to stable. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
