FC5T2 ready for even a test release?

Nils Philippsen nphilipp at redhat.com
Thu Jan 26 13:35:16 UTC 2006

On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 10:28 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 1/22/06, gb spam <gbofspam at gmail.com> wrote:
> > We value everything installs, it works for us and jumping
> > through hoops (write web apps; managing kickstart files; using
> > kickstart during installs - does it still not tell you if it can't
> > load the ks file until you get to a point in the install where your
> > options haven't been selected?) is "less convenient" than clicking a
> > check box during install.
> So let me get this straight.. nothing other than a single check box
> during install is going to satify you?  There is no room to
> compromise? You've drawn the line in the sand and you are holding your
> breath?  That's unfortunate.
> Some of us, are working with the maintainers to identify which
> packages are not incorporated into the comps grouping structure
> correctly so that the functionality of the install all button will
> essentially be duplicate by selecting all displayed packages in all
> displayed groups during the install process.

Hmm: Are you really implying (I don't think so) that browsing all the
groups, going into the details for each of them, selecting all the
optional packages is somehow equivalent to clicking one checkbox? Well,
maybe in the outcome but definitely not in terms of time consumed and
wear and tear on fingers, mouse buttons, etc. ;-). I guess if we had a
means of selecting none/recommended/all packages for specific
groups/subgroups with a single click, they amount of complaints would be
drastically reduced.

     Nils Philippsen    /    Red Hat    /    nphilipp at redhat.com
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
 safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."     -- B. Franklin, 1759
 PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list