On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/31/2012 03:33 PM, drago01 wrote: >> >> >> That's nonsense see the other mail. Would it be more work to maintain >> two branches? Sure. Impossible? *NO*. Even if it delays newui to F20 >> so be it. >> If we don't have the resources to do something we should not pretend >> that we have (we are currently seeing where this leads to). > > > I agree with that. It is clear that a lot of features have been part of > that single feature proposal (new ui, new upgrade tool, no lvm by default > etc) and we just didn't have enough time to do it all within this cycle. > Either the feature should have been pushed back to another release or two or > more resources have should have been provided to the Anaconda team for this > ambitious goal or the release should have been extended *deliberately* ahead > of time. No LVM by default also seems to have raised some questions around > communication with the storage team. It's already been pushed back once, the first iteration of newui was attempted to land in F-17 and was pushed back to F-18 if my memory serves me correctly. So I think we need to land it now and deal with the fall out then move on. The one thing that concerns me is the lack of communications about LVM with the storage team as it makes me wonder what else has been missed/assumed. > I must note however that I am very much in favour of the new UI and any > criticism directed towards the process doesn't change that at all. The end > result of this is that Fedora is suffering through several unexpected and > unprecedented release delays. Me too! I think it's long over due and with luck once it's there it should be more modular and we, with luck, or at least I hope, will have an anaconda that is easier to deal with and extend/change moving forward. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
