On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/17/2014 05:07 PM, drago01 wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 10/17/2014 04:24 PM, Tom Rivers wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 10/17/2014 10:05, drago01 wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Because it makes no sense and pushes it to the user. The os (i.e we) >>>>> should handle that. In that case we should do both 1) have lower >>>>> bandwith requirements (i.e use deltas) *and* 2) have fast installation >>>>> of updates. Those two goals are not mutually exclusive. Its just the >>>>> current implementation that is lacking. So instead of messing with >>>>> questions during the installation we should just fix that. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If the proper configuration can be determined automagically, >>> >>> >>> Well a package installer can't have the knowledge which would be required >>> to >>> determine such a decision. >>> >>> E.g. though a user could be connected via a fast connection he may have a >>> limited download contingent or could be charged at a high rate per >>> download >>> volume. >>> >>> I.e. I don't see a possibility but to leave the final decision to the >>> user. >> >> >> Did you even read my mail? The point is there shouldn't be a choice to >> be made in the first place. Which makes "how to choose what" moot. > > Did you read my mail? I say, "no choice" is inapplicable, non-useful, naive > non-sense. You missed the point again. Making a choice only makes sense between mutually exclusive choices. In case you can have both (given a better implementation) the goal should be that. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
