On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Am 17.10.2014 um 17:07 schrieb drago01: > >> 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. > > > so how do you imagine that decision happens later? > the user deliberate makes the change? > > don't get me wrong but than you have no expierience about the ordinary > users, they don't do anything, even not react if someone alerts them about a > hacked mailaccount abused for spam-sending over days and after security > warnings about Heartbleed and "please change your passwords" another one > choses his first name as new secure password > > *that* is what you can expect from users and if you work in the IT and have > a different expierience go out every morning and kiss them! I have no idea what your mail has anything to do with that but I try to explain it one more time. Currently we have 1) deltarpms -> low bandwidth use but takes a while to apply the updates 2) no deltarpms -> high bandwidth use but faster updates application. So now people suggest the user (or the distro) has to either choose 1) or 2) ... What I am suggesting is adding a third option: 3) Use less bandwidth *and* apply updates fast (by fixing deltarpm). So if we have 3) the choice between 1) and 2) does not make much sense. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
