default file system, was: Comparison to Workstation Technical Specification

[Chris Murphy]

On Feb 26, 2014, at 2:11 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 15:32 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> 
>>> It is kind of a significant convenience, though, and I agree Josh kinda
>>> underplayed it. Losing the ability to install alongside full-disk
>>> Windows installations without asking the user to do some pre-flight work
>>> themselves would be a significant loss.
>> 
>> The question was about XFS's lack of ability to shrink.  Not Windows.
>> In that context, and in the context Pete is talking about, XFS being
>> able to shrink really isn't a factor.  Windows is already installed,
>> and you'll be shrinking that filesystem to make room for a Fedora
>> install, not the other way around.
> 
> yeah, I noticed the context switch in my follow-up email, sorry. I do
> think the 'user wants to install something else alongside Fedora' case
> is worth caring about at least a little bit, but having custom part
> available is probably good enough.


Most users don't know XFS isn't shrinkable. Most of the target market for the easy path is likely used to ext3/4, NTFS, and HFS+ all of which are shrinkable. And yet a minority would choose a shrinkable file system if they knew the default was not shrinkable.

So I opine it's not a factor in whether XFS should be the default file system. But it is a factor in helping the user make the best choice for them, in advance, rather than them having an oh crap moment later. 

Docs should consider adding it as a virtual tooltip in the quick install guide. And maybe it's possible to have a real tooltip in the installer. 


Chris Murphy