[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Glade files for anaconda UI (storage)

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:29:48AM -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Friday, June 19 2009, Joel Granados said:
> > 1. I would hold all detection of stuff that would otherwise take
> > anaconda too long to detect [1], until the autopart screen.  Where the
> > user can choose to go with the "local" detected storage or to use the
> > additional configuration  iscsi, zFCP ...
> "Additional configuration" seems like a weird verbage to use here and
> especially having it where it's placed.  The way we add additional disks
> now at least seems to me a little more obvious, although it needs some
> different wording if we're putting any sort of filtering there

Yep, the actual name is strange-ish.  Personally, I don't care much for the it.
What is important to me is that we might want to put some addtional
stuff into the "thing" (whatever you want to call it).

> > 3. Since we are (hopefully) running devicetree.py:scan after this
> > screen [2], the disks that appear in the list are going to be the "base
> > devices" [3].  This would mean that the dmraid stuff will not appear
> > there, which it currently does.  But I don't think this is a big deal as
> > VG and LV do not appear there either.
> dmraid is (at least conceptually) different from LVM, though -- I set up
> as one "logical" disk in the BIOS much like I would with a hardware RAID
> array.  Having the individual disks then show up has been a way that
> people have gotten into trouble in the past, especially if they're
> dual-booting

You are right!. This goes with the different types of scanning issue.
Is giving the device scanning some granularity something that we would
want to do.  Something like `devicetree.py:scan_TYPE_devices`  I know we
handle the different devices in different ways, but we cannot currently
scan a specifi device.

> > 4. I don't know where to put the encrypt checkbox.  I really don't like
> > it in the outside window as it is not valid for all the configurations.
> > Custom, for example ignores this checkbox.  I could (maybe) placed in
> > Additional configuration, but then it would be quite hidden, something that
> > I would want to avoid.
> Yeah, I don't entirely like where it is now but it works pretty well.
> And custom currently desensitizes a fair bit of the pre-selecting you
> can do now

definitelly something to look at.

> > 6. I vote fo also ignoring the devices that the user unchecks in this
> > screen.  This would mean that the list would have to be considered with
> > the custom button as well.  So when the custom screen pops up, it will
> > only show the selecte disks.
> We've gone back and forth on this one over time... I'm willing to give
> the other way a try.
> The other general comment I have is that the bootable radio button is
> likely to be obscured / way off to the far right in the treeview.  Plus
> having a checkbox and a radio button in the same row is at least a
> little odd.

Yep, this was one of the thing that I didn't like from the first cycle.
But I still think that we can configure it in a different, better way.


> Jeremy
> _______________________________________________
> Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
> Anaconda-devel-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list

Joel Andres Granados
Brno, Czech Republic, Red Hat.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]