F21 partitioning circus

[Chris Murphy]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:04 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:
> On 02/26/2015 07:26 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/25/2015 09:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>> If people aren't actually going to test what we have, and file bug
>>>> report,
>>>
>>>
>>> If you want to see this thing fixed, tested and see bug reports, then
>>> publish updates on a regular basis. Monthly network installer iso images,
>>> for instance.
>>
>>
>> Rawhide nightlies have boot.iso (which is network installer ISO).
>
>
> I am not talking about rawhide (which I consider to be a dumping ground for
> packages), I am talking about released distros and in-release-preps distros.
> I.e. updated images for f20. f21, f22.


You want more releases to complain about without offering specifics or
bug reports. This isn't trustworthy reasoning, so near as I can tell
you're just a nut.



>
>>> And yes, an aspect, we haven't yet discussed is the look'n'feel of the
>>> GUI -
>>> Sure, this is personal taste, I do not consider the anaconda GUI changes
>>> as
>>> improvements.
>>
>>
>> I have criticized the UI/UX of the installer. I have almost totally
>> given up on that at this point because there's just no will power on
>> the part of Anaconda to fix it, absent extremely clear proven concepts
>> to fix the deficiencies rather than just throw spaghetti at a wall to
>> find out how many less users the UI/UX annoys. So if you have some
>> mock ups and at least clear rationalization of how this improves
>> UI/UX, file an RFE. But it's better if you can at least ping the
>> Fedora UI expert: http://blog.linuxgrrl.com/
>
>
> "Fedora UI expert"? Sorry, but I am ROTFL.
>
> I don't know on which basis this person has gained the "expertise" from, but
> my personal impression on this GUI work definitely is negative. It's
> fashion-design not usability/functionality-oriented design.

You're quite the oaf. I'll use small words, so hopefully you'll understand.

The preferred practice when flinging shit, is to be specific where it
lands, rather than wholly smearing people. Otherwise, if you get to do
this to others, they get to do it to you, and then where does it end?

Pro tip: Don't pull down your pants and take a dump on people in
public, like you just did. Being an oaf doesn't absolve you of this
minimum etiquette.


>
>>>
>>>> let alone "expert" features that
>>>> only sometimes work.
>>>
>>>
>>> Once again: I feel you are trying to have "smart" features - This is not
>>> what "experts" want -
>>
>>
>> Tough.
>>
>>> They want full control,
>>
>>
>> Tough.
>
>
> I don't buy this. The working principle should pretty simple.
>
>> OK well I'll put you in the troublemaker category too because you keep
>> saying you see problems but you've given no examples and you've
>> supplied no bug reports.
>
> OK, provided what you say, I'll put you into the non-cooperational,
> learning-resistant RH-puppet category.
>
> EOT

Cute. Throwing toys out of the pram now.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/11/conspiracy_theory_psychology_people_who_claim_to_know_the_truth_about_jfk.html

According to that I shouldn't call you paranoid and delusional. But
seeing as this is beyond my area of interest or expertise I'll leave
your trust issues in your own hands. Or maybe it's in the water you're
drinking?


-- 
Chris Murphy