On 10/31/2016 03:42 AM, Tomáš Smetana wrote:
The NFS server GUI seems to (partly) a re-iteration of an idea that has been
propsed some time ago already:
I don't think we want to deliver this as a completely separate install. There
are plenty of NAS-focused distributions out there and I don't think there's much
value in trying to play in that space.
I *do* think there's value in being a general-purpose server that has very good
(and approachable) NAS functionality.
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 15:42:18 -0400
Jon Stanley <jonstanley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com>
>> I'll make a few suggestions on the doc.
> As for one of the suggestions that was made on the doc, I'd rather
> have this discussion on the list than in the doc.
>> I'm pretty firmly against this. We already have UI in Cockpit for
>> creating new volumes using storaged. If we do anything specific here, we
>> should just redirect people to that spoke in Cockpit.
> (note to readers: "this" is referring to creation of the underlying
> storage as part of the NFS server role)
> Are we going to provide something useful, or a construction kit to
> make useful things? I think that we're targeting inexperienced admins,
> therefore I think that a frictionless experience from out of the box
> to something that is up providing services on the network is the
> standard that we should strive for.
There are existing products with existing user-base having similar
functionality (FreeNAS, Open Media Vault,...). Wouldn't it make sense to get
Yes, in terms of providing UI, we should absolutely look at existing
I also spoke with David Lehman on IRC yesterday who noted that storaged is
looking at adding API for dealing with NFS shares. He indicated that if there's
a strong desire for that, we should let them know so they can prioritize it.