On 1/22/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Jan 2006, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 1/22/06, gb spam <gbofspam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>We value everything installs, it works for us and jumping through
>>>hoops (write web apps; managing kickstart files; using kickstart
>>>during installs - does it still not tell you if it can't load the
>>>ks file until you get to a point in the install where your options
>>>haven't been selected?) is "less convenient" than clicking a check
>>>box during install.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>So let me get this straight.. nothing other than a single check box
>>during install is going to satify you? There is no room to
>>compromise? You've drawn the line in the sand and you are holding
>>your breath? That's unfortunate.
>>
>>
>
>um ... no. what's unfortunate is your condescending attitude towards
>folks who are pointing out that they *like* the concept of an
>everything install. that would include folks like *me*, by the way.
>does that mean you're going to insult me as well?
>
>
>
Can you explain to me a few different use cases which makes it a good
argument to be available by default other than selecting package groups,
kickstart and using yum . Please explain with rationale instead of just
stating your preference.
--
Rahul
Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
--
The problem is, folks don't want to go through each category and select "everything" they like the simple one click and done option. Me personally, I like the "minimum" check box but thats gone too :)
-- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list