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

Re: Removing the number of installation screens (F-14)



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 11 May 2010, Hans de Goede wrote:

Hi,

For F-14, I would like to see the number of
installation screens reduced, thus making the installer more
friendly for less experienced users.

Some ideas:

1) Add an "advanced" cmdline option, and when this is not present:
* Do not ask for advanced storage use
* Do not ask what sort of installation (workstation / development machine /
 server) to do, simply do a default install
* Maybe hide "review partitioning" and "custom layout" partitioning options

I know people don't like this, but since we target a rather wide audience
from beginning users to people who want to use SAN's, I really believe we
need to differentiate between the two, and as has been argued before adding
a UI to differentiate between the two will only lead to everyone simply
selecting advanced as they are afraid they will miss out on some choices, so
moving this to the cmdline where power users will be able to find it, seems
like a possible answer to me.

I think you are correct in that we need to differentiate between the types of
users.  I am not a big fan of adding command line options to enable/disable
screens in the installer, so maybe we could do a variation on the command line
option.

We could configure what screens are shown or skipped in the installclass.  Do
we still have 'expert' as a boot option?  If so, we could key on that to
enable the screens we hide by default in the installclass.  The fedora
installclass could skip the ones you mention and the rhel one could show them
by default.

Of course, this would probably require some work on the installclass design.

2) There is no need to configure the root password during installation, move
this to firstboot preferably to the user configuration screen.

I am not opposed to moving this screen to firstboot, but I think this is more
of a policy decision for Fedora rather than a technical decision.  In which
case, I guess we should ask FESCo.

- -- David Cantrell <dcantrell redhat com>
Red Hat / Honolulu, HI

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkvpZdEACgkQ5hsjjIy1VknfxACfSeB3HuBjoB6xEKATGI2nnRD6
ZH4AoLnnpHXsZs/6FsqPO+Ko4xPCQpMz
=JIKX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


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