On 2012/07/09 15:59 (GMT-0700) Adam Williamson composed:
Chris Lumens wrote:
(1) In our experience, most people will decide they are advanced (they
genuinely think they are advanced, or don't want to feel like they're
missing something, etc.) so there's little point to dividing the
interf
As always, minutes and IRC transcript available on the wiki at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20120709
Next meeting is scheduled for 2012-07-16 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting.
If you have topics you think we should bring up at the meeting, please
add them to the Wiki page at
https
On 2012/07/09 16:43 (GMT-0400) Chris Lumens composed:
(3) The time for making major design decisions was the first half of
2011, when we started talking about this.
And now is too soon to put it on F19's table?
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive."
On 07/10/2012 11:31 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> For example, the network download time for updates will
> be the same no matter when you do the update.
Also, eliminating the "add repo" option will/could avoid the unpleasant
situation
were there is a dependency issue in the update repos. A rare occur
On 07/10/2012 10:48 AM, Matteo Settenvini wrote:
> If we really are talking about "newbies" here, keep in mind that people
> are *scared* of too much options. If you ask them if they want KDE,
> GNOME, XFCE, ... they will just stare blindly before going back "in the
> system were you didn't need to
Il giorno mar, 10/07/2012 alle 00.33 +0800, Ed Greshko ha scritto:
> On 07/10/2012 12:19 AM, David wrote:
>
> You see.. You already know all that. You are a bad example.
>
> You give people too much credit. Do you really think everyone will do
> "research"?
>
> I feel it is better to d
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 18:58 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 15:57 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 14:50 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Please show researched statistics to support your claim and
> > > > > > implication
> > > > > > that this i
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 15:57 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 14:50 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
>
> > > > > Please show researched statistics to support your claim and
> > > > > implication
> > > > > that this is a minority group. I question and doubt you actually have
> > > >
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 17:12 -0400, Chris Lumens wrote:
> This lines up pretty nicely with live installs, by the way, which
> currently make up somewhere around half of all installations. And when
Well, there's an obvious counterpoint there...*only* half of all people
pick live images to use for
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 16:43 -0400, Chris Lumens wrote:
> > Idea: the installer branches just from the beginning:
> >
> > -Easy install (only installs Gnome)
> >
> > -Advanced install (shows a big warning screen about installng multiple
> > DEs, could be confusing, not recommended for newcomers, y
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 14:50 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> > > > Please show researched statistics to support your claim and implication
> > > > that this is a minority group. I question and doubt you actually have
> > > > statistics on any of these groups.
> > >
> > > Too busy trying to actually d
> I think it's much simpler: Just revert the DE radio buttons to the original
> checkboxes, so people can choose more than one, and if someone does that, pop
> up
> a warning.
We are trying to keep the number of spurious dialogs and confirmations
to a minimum, as we've gotten many complaints over
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Chris Lumens wrote:
> (3) The time for making major design decisions was the first half of
> 2011, when we started talking about this.
so it´s a done deal, that´s what you´re saying.
OK, then. There isn´t much point in havng arguments about done deals, then.
FC
-
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Chris Lumens wrote:
> (1) In our experience, most people will decide they are advanced (they
> genuinely think they are advanced, or don't want to feel like they're
> missing something, etc.) so there's little point to dividing the
> interface like this.
then the p
Fernando Cassia gmail.com> writes:
> Idea: the installer branches just from the beginning:
>
> -Easy install (only installs Gnome)
>
> -Advanced install (shows a big warning screen about installng multiple
> DEs, could be confusing, not recommended for newcomers, your pet could
> die, etc etc )
> Idea: the installer branches just from the beginning:
>
> -Easy install (only installs Gnome)
>
> -Advanced install (shows a big warning screen about installng multiple
> DEs, could be confusing, not recommended for newcomers, your pet could
> die, etc etc ).
>
> bingo, both sides pleased.
>
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Christopher A. Williams
wrote:
> Why not instead have a good set of defaults in the installer, with a
> "Don't try this at home unless you're a professional" button to open up
> options for those who choose to do so, and then highly polish the whole
> thing. Is that
Richard Ryniker (ryni...@alum.mit.edu) said:
> Perhaps it is the GNOME/X-server example, which seems to be precisely
> what package dependencies handle, that obscures the point you want to
> make.
Except, they don't.
The desktops do not require an X server; they could be run remotely.
The deskt
Colby Mckethen gmail.com> writes:
> Both sides of this conversation feel very passionately obviously. And there is
nothing wrong
> with that at all its just dissapointing to me to see it become a personal
attack instead of a
> healthy debate on why or why not certain pieces should be included. I
>to prevent the user doing something silly like trying to install GNOME
>but forgetting the X server and fonts.
I think the Package Manager copes with this very well, especially when
the installation source is a release DVD. Unlike the network
repositories, which can become inconsistant as indivi
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, David Lehman wrote:
I can tell you from personal experience that Fedora has both real and
imaginary idiots. Just kidding. We have two opposing groups of users:
Those who think the installer should have a knob for whatever their
obscure pet option is, and those who believe it
Both sides of this conversation feel very passionately obviously. And there
is nothing wrong with that at all its just dissapointing to me to see it
become a personal attack instead of a healthy debate on why or why not
certain pieces should be included. I agree having numerous DEs available is
nic
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 12:12 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 12:49 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:23 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:52 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> > > > > Exactly what is so bad with "that p
Andre Robatino (robat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> The package set on the DVD is currently chosen to allow essentially
> everything to be installed at once (with transient exceptions such as
> samba3/4), hence the repoclosure and file conflicts tests. If the
> installer itself is going to make th
I have Gnome and Xfce both installed on my Fedora 16 server.
I need gnome-control-panel sound to control a Xonar DX sound card.
I have not found another mixer app that properly controls this card.
I need Xfce because Gnome over VNC is terrible.
I could tolerate having to choose one DE if Gnome
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 12:49 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:23 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:52 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> > > > Exactly what is so bad with "that practice" (of installing both
> > > > desktops) as to "frown upon it"?
> >
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:23 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:52 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> > > Exactly what is so bad with "that practice" (of installing both desktops)
> > > as to "frown upon it"?
> > >
> > > I am a KDE user and yet I still install Gnome on my m
Sandro Mani (manisan...@gmail.com) said:
> Hi,
>
> I have noticed that when using GRUB_TERMINAL=gfxterm (that is, the
> default option, which I think is gfxterm), full-screen flash
> performance is bad (on a 1440x900 screen it is barely ok, on a
> 1920x1200 screen it's terrible).
> But if I put G
David Lehman redhat.com> writes:
> I can tell you from personal experience that Fedora has both real and
> imaginary idiots. Just kidding. We have two opposing groups of users:
> Those who think the installer should have a knob for whatever their
> obscure pet option is, and those who believe it
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:52 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
> > Exactly what is so bad with "that practice" (of installing both desktops)
> > as to "frown upon it"?
> >
> > I am a KDE user and yet I still install Gnome on my machine. Exactly what
> > crime do I commit?
>
> Only being unwilling to ch
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 23:59 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 11:43 PM, David Lehman wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 07:49 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> >> Agreed. And I fear the universe, in this case, may be winning by
> >> producing "bigger idiot" developers.
> > Indeed -- "big
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 10:21 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> And I would further posit that, since the position has been taken that
> you can override all of this post-install, the potential complexity is
> only reduced in the installation process. The installed system remains
> just as comp
On 7/9/2012 12:33 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 07/10/2012 12:19 AM, David wrote:
Anytime I hear this or something similar - "coming from the Windows
world and not aware they have a choice in the DeskTop" - I wonder just
who would wipe out a working OS on a computer and install 'something
named Linux
On Sat, 2012-07-07 at 08:14 -0600, Dariusz J. Garbowski wrote:
> On 07/07/12 03:15 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 07/06/2012 07:10 PM, Andre Robatino wrote:
> >> I attempted installation using Fedora-20120703-x86_64-916dfe7-netinst.iso
> >> and
> >> found that it only allows choosing on
> Chris, if you have any amendments to the above or the list of tests on
> the Wiki page, please let us know! Thanks. If anyone's unclear about
> this whole thing, which I pretty much just threw together at 10pm after
> a couple of beers, do ping me, here or on IRC.
Having looked at the first coup
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 07:31 +0200, Petr Schindler wrote:
> On So, 2012-07-07 at 09:15 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > On 07/06/2012 07:10 PM, Andre Robatino wrote:
> > > I attempted installation using Fedora-20120703-x86_64-916dfe7-netinst.iso
> > > and
> > > found that it only allows ch
On 07/10/2012 12:19 AM, David wrote:
> Anytime I hear this or something similar - "coming from the Windows
> world and not aware they have a choice in the DeskTop" - I wonder just
> who would wipe out a working OS on a computer and install 'something
> named Linux' without doing any reach. None. Re
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 23:59 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 11:43 PM, David Lehman wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 07:49 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> >> Agreed. And I fear the universe, in this case, may be winning by
> >> producing "bigger idiot" developers.
> > Indeed -- "big
On 7/9/2012 11:59 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 07/09/2012 11:43 PM, David Lehman wrote:
On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 07:49 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
Agreed. And I fear the universe, in this case, may be winning by
producing "bigger idiot" developers.
Indeed -- "bigger idiot" developers who se
On 07/09/2012 11:43 PM, David Lehman wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 07:49 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
>> Agreed. And I fear the universe, in this case, may be winning by
>> producing "bigger idiot" developers.
> Indeed -- "bigger idiot" developers who seek to simplify their software
> by
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Dariusz J. Garbowski
wrote:
> This is once again an imaginary, or made-up user, so that you can support
> your arguments and ignore real Fedora users. How is it that this practice of
> making up users to support cases for writing software for idiots has spread
> so
On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 07:49 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> Agreed. And I fear the universe, in this case, may be winning by
> producing "bigger idiot" developers.
Indeed -- "bigger idiot" developers who seek to simplify their software
by eliminating limited-value features that bring needl
Added an automatic test in the dracut testsuite, so that this never happens
again.. Sorry for the inconvenience. Yes, rawhide sometimes eats babies.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 15:45:26 +0200,
Sandro Mani wrote:
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
To actually get a graphical login I had to set enforcing mode to permissive.
I am not sure if this is a bug or a labelling issue. (I'm relabelling now.)
sedispath was getting bl
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 08:09:08 -0500,
>
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>>
>>
>> After cleaning up from dracut-020-51, installing
>> dracut-020-57.git20120709.fc18 and running the kernel scripts (to run
>> dracut) I can now boot. Don't the ply
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 3:09 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Am 09.07.2012 09:44, schrieb Harald Hoyer:
> > Do not install dracut-020-51!
> >
> > Sorry for those, who have been bitten by dracut-020-51. Instead of
> installing to
> > the /var/tmp/initramfs.* directory, it installed in your real root.
> >
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 08:09:08 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
After cleaning up from dracut-020-51, installing
dracut-020-57.git20120709.fc18 and running the kernel scripts (to run
dracut) I can now boot. Don't the plymouth bug is still there, so I
have to manually deal with home, swap an
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 07:08:06 -0500,
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 18:19:53 -0700,
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
I did not ask for any encrypted file system.
It just didn't work.
It looks like the current issue is likely fallout from installing
dractut-020-51 a
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 18:19:53 -0700,
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
I did not ask for any encrypted file system.
It just didn't work.
It looks like the current issue is likely fallout from installing
dractut-020-51 as noted in one of the other replies. This probably breaks
things
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 09:30:08 +0100,
Frank Murphy wrote:
On 08/07/12 00:29, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-July/169602.html
That appears to be related to the latest problem I was seeing. I'll try fixing
that and see if I can get back to the p
Am 09.07.2012 09:44, schrieb Harald Hoyer:
> Do not install dracut-020-51!
>
> Sorry for those, who have been bitten by dracut-020-51. Instead of installing
> to
> the /var/tmp/initramfs.* directory, it installed in your real root.
>
> To remove most (if not all) of the files, it has installed,
On 08/07/12 00:29, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-July/169602.html
--
Regards,
Frank
"Jack of all, fubars"
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On 07/08/2012 07:18 PM, David wrote:
On 7/8/2012 10:01 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
On 07/08/2012 06:54 PM, David wrote:
On 7/8/2012 9:19 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
On 07/08/2012 04:56 PM, David wrote:
On 7/8/2012 4:37 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
On 07/
Do not install dracut-020-51!
Sorry for those, who have been bitten by dracut-020-51. Instead of installing to
the /var/tmp/initramfs.* directory, it installed in your real root.
To remove most (if not all) of the files, it has installed, do the following:
# rm /.bash_history
# rm /dracut-state.
54 matches
Mail list logo
