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

[Josef Bacik]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:54 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
<johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 11:42 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>
>> It's already been pushed back once, the first iteration of newui was
>> attempted to land in F-17 and was pushed back to F-18 if my memory
>> serves me correctly.
>
>
> Dont think it did
>
>
>>   So I think we need to land it now and deal with
>> the fall out then move on. The one thing that concerns me is the lack
>> of communications about LVM with the storage team as it makes me
>> wonder what else has been missed/assumed.
>
>
> Lack of communication lol those RH storage developers could have.
>
> A) subscribed to the Anaconda developers list to monitor changes relevant to
> their setup as anyone else affected by any upstream changes ( this got
> mentioned in August )
> B) bothered to do a simple test install of alpha they would have noticed
> that the installer did not default to LVM partition layout by default and
> had that discussion then and there...
>
> So the Storage team within Red Hat they themselves expecting the Anaconda
> team to be running around notify them or FESCO for that matter is just utter
> and total bullocks and their little lvm no being turned on by default pails
> in comparison with what we ( QA Community )  "discovered" where missing in
> the installer early on...
>

You know what the storage team does right?  I can only speak for
myself really, but 26 hours out of the day my head is buried in btrfs.
 Sure I'm subscribed to anaconda devel and fedora devel, which means I
search "btrfs" in my fedora-devel and anaconda folders once a week to
see if somebody is complaining.  We just had a big get together in
August with the storage developers and anaconda people and I don't
remember hearing anything about this.  The anaconda guys are the same
way, they focus on the installer and don't look up unless they have
to.  So when I need something btrfs-y done in Anaconda I go find Dave
or somebody and tell them what I need and we get it worked out
together.  The same thing should be done from the anaconda side when
it comes to changing the basic behavior of storage in Fedora.  Red Hat
employs the top storage developers in the world, why would they not
take advantage of that expertise and experience?  So no it's not
"utter and total bullocks" to expect some sort of heads up when it
comes to storage related changes in anaconda, we're all on the same
team and why would you not talk to each other?  We should be working
to create a well integrated solution for our users that provides the
best possible experience, and the only way we get that done is if we
all work together.  Thanks,

Josef