On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 11:56 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > Directed more broadly at all three products: > > > > Formal proposal (for discussion): All three products agree to use ext4 > > for /boot and XFS-on-LVM for all other partitions in the "guided" > > mode. All is fair game in the "custom" mode. > > > > Also, for the sake of everyone's sanity, as we discuss this specific > > proposal, let's hold the conversation to devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > (making this the last cross-posted message in the thread). > > ... I understand that synergy can help, but given we likely expect usage > of all(*) the local fileystems, is there a reason the three produces need to > share partitioning setup? > > (*) well, not reiserfs We can expect use of them, but if all the products agree, then we at least have one default that we can test to destruction. As discussed in another thread around here somewhere, we (QA) would like to return to the clear distinction between custom- and non-custom partitioning, where non-custom is as 'choice-free' as plausible and correspondingly reliable, and custom is a best-effort thing. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
