Installation plays hardball

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 11:22 -0500, John Aldrich wrote:
> I can see both sides of this. I don't think it would hurt anything to
> have 
> a *little* hand-holding by the installer, something to the effect of
> "If you 
> don't want to blow everythign away and start from scratch, choose a 
> different option" when you just accept the default. OTOH, I don't
> really 
> want to turn Fedora into the "Microsoft" of linux where you don't have
> to 
> expend any brain power to install!

I don't think anyone has suggested that. I'm just saying the choices
should be available, but the consequences should be clear. I know for a
fact that on several occasions I've had to guess whether what I was
doing was the right thing because the UI made too many assumptions.
Sorry I can't be more specific (the last couple of times I just used
preupgrade so it's been a while).

Somewhat OT: IMHO one thing that makes installing Fedora harder than it
needs to be for the majority of users is the default use of LVM. I've
been using Fedora since before it was Fedora, and have *never* had a
situation in which LVM was any use to me. I understand the benefits it
brings to large installations with complex and varying storage
requirements, but that's not the case for most people and having to deal
with its highly domain-specific terminology turns it into a mental
obstacle that would be better avoided.

poc