On 10/31/12 9:13 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:54 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" > <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 10/31/2012 11:42 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: >>> >>> 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. >> >> >> Dont think it did >> >> >>> 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. >> >> >> Lack of communication lol those RH storage developers could have. >> >> A) subscribed to the Anaconda developers list to monitor changes relevant to >> their setup as anyone else affected by any upstream changes ( this got >> mentioned in August ) >> B) bothered to do a simple test install of alpha they would have noticed >> that the installer did not default to LVM partition layout by default and >> had that discussion then and there... >> >> So the Storage team within Red Hat they themselves expecting the Anaconda >> team to be running around notify them or FESCO for that matter is just utter >> and total bullocks and their little lvm no being turned on by default pails >> in comparison with what we ( QA Community ) "discovered" where missing in >> the installer early on... >> > > You know what the storage team does right? I can only speak for > myself really, but 26 hours out of the day my head is buried in btrfs. > Sure I'm subscribed to anaconda devel and fedora devel, which means I > search "btrfs" in my fedora-devel and anaconda folders once a week to > see if somebody is complaining. We just had a big get together in > August with the storage developers and anaconda people and I don't > remember hearing anything about this. The anaconda guys are the same > way, they focus on the installer and don't look up unless they have > to. So when I need something btrfs-y done in Anaconda I go find Dave > or somebody and tell them what I need and we get it worked out > together. The same thing should be done from the anaconda side when > it comes to changing the basic behavior of storage in Fedora. Red Hat > employs the top storage developers in the world, why would they not > take advantage of that expertise and experience? So no it's not > "utter and total bullocks" to expect some sort of heads up when it > comes to storage related changes in anaconda, we're all on the same > team and why would you not talk to each other? We should be working > to create a well integrated solution for our users that provides the > best possible experience, and the only way we get that done is if we > all work together. Thanks, Preach it, brother. ;) Josef is right, we have rather full days making sure all your data is safe & fast, and keeping an eye out for sudden changes in installer behavior just isn't always on our radar. I haven't test-installed F18, personally; I've been busy chasing upstream ext4 metadata corruption bugs and the like. I trusted the feature process to publicize and vet any significant installer changes in the fs/storage realm, TBH. -Eric > Josef > -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
