rfc: expectations for partitioning, Fedora.next

[Jaroslav Reznik]

> >> So really, I'm fairly convinced at this point that what's needed is
> >> feature chop, it's just a matter of how much which depends on what
> >> quality level expectations the WGs decide upon.
> > 
> > What's your plan for moving forward with this?
> 
> No plan. But I question whether WG members really understand the state of the
> installer: how many outcomes it enables; how many QA resources go into
> testing it as a percentage of all testing; and yet despite that, as a
> percentage of outcomes, how QA likely isn't testing even a majority of
> Manual partitioning outcomes; and the perception of Fedora users expecting
> that these outcomes have at least been attempted by QA. I think there's a
> disconnect. And I'm happy to be totally wrong about that, but when I look at
> other installers, I can't help but think they're successful not because of
> what they can do, but what they refuse to do. And yeah, we aren't going to
> ever have an installer that only produces 5 or 6 outcomes, it'll probably
> always be several dozen at a minimum. But several dozen right now would be
> an f'n godsend compared to what we've got.
> 
> So I think the factual information of the installer state of affair, user
> perception and WG expectations for the installer need better qualification.

Workstation WG is now discussing Technical Specifications - one part of it
is installer and they are aware of current installer situation.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Technical_Specification#System_Installer

Jaroslav

> 
> Chris Murphy
> --
> test mailing list
> test at lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test