Anaconda is totally trashing the F18 schedule (was Re: f18: how to install into a LVM partitions (or RAID))

drago01 drago01 at
Wed Oct 31 10:01:22 UTC 2012

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Vratislav Podzimek
<vpodzime at> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 10:33 +0100, drago01 wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Vratislav Podzimek
>> <vpodzime at> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 19:32 +0100, Gianluca Sforna wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at> wrote:
>> >> > I'd recommend asking dcantrell, as he has some good points on this
>> >> > topic. I broadly agree with him that it might well be more or less
>> >> > impossible to smoothly handle a major rewrite of anaconda in our current
>> >> > development process. CCing to make sure he sees this.
>> >>
>> >> If you are saying that 6 months are a too short time for something
>> >> like this I think I can understand it.
>> > 6 months are a too short time. And it was less than 6 months. As can be
>> > seen from the F18 release schedule [1], originally it was about 3 months
>> > between the day F17 was released and the day new Anaconda was expected
>> > to work (F18 Alpha release).
>> Sure in that case you shouldn't have propose it for F18 to begin with
>> but take your time and introduce it in F19. There is no need for this
>> rush.
> I don't see any advantage in that, because it would end up the same as
> with F17 and F18. We don't do only changes we want to do and we come up
> with. As many other packages change these changes have to be reflected
> in Anaconda [1]. And that's the work that has to be done no matter we
> want/need to focus on the redesign/rewrite or not.

Not buying that .... anaconda is not the only package that interacts
with others.

You can have a newui branch where you rewrite things (you could also
provide images for people to test) while having the working version in
a stable branch,
Once newui is feature complete it can be moved to stable.

More information about the devel mailing list