On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 10:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hi, folks! We did the release blocker bug review meeting today, > and one of the bugs that came up for discussion was this one: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134524 > > The question of whether this bug is a release blocker comes down > pretty clearly to the status of the Workstation network install > image. That is, the image is clearly busted, so if we care about > that image, we should consider the bug a release blocker. I don't think the question is whether we care about the image - I think the question is whether we make the image available! My strong opinions here are restricted to three things: 1) If made available, the netinst image must work. Otherwise, we're blaming the user for our bugs. 2) What you get going through either path should be identical; installing from the network shouldn't put you into a choose-your-own-adventure path of selecting desktops and optional server components. This may be more aspirational for F21 than something we can achieve this cycle. 3) The netinst image should not look like an equal alternative to the "live" image (which I think is a misnomer) in the web presentation. Making it seem you need to decide whether you want to try out Fedora first or just install it is deceptive; generally, we want people to just go ahead and get the full image. I don't have strong opinions about whether we make the netinst image available at all. My vague feeling is that yes, it should be available, because it's more similar to a kickstarted installation of the workstation, which is probably useful have working and tested to give identical results to the live image installation.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlP+R7IACgkQeiVVYja6o6PvBACfYk+GKDEZtLK4YF5rYzSTfIDh mUQAnAgu9cFbK3XElvw5fu1Ki5gmYRmd =JQNU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From: "Stephen Gallagher" <sgallagh(a)redhat.com&gt; To: desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 11:03:46 PM Subject: Re: IMPORTANT (release blocker): Status of Workstation network install -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/27/2014 02:46 PM, Owen Taylor wrote: > On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 10:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: >> Hi, folks! We did the release blocker bug review meeting today, >> and one of the bugs that came up for discussion was this one: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1134524 >> >> The question of whether this bug is a release blocker comes down >> pretty clearly to the status of the Workstation network install >> image. That is, the image is clearly busted, so if we care about >> that image, we should consider the bug a release blocker. > > I don't think the question is whether we care about the image - I > think the question is whether we make the image available! > > My strong opinions here are restricted to three things: > > 1) If made available, the netinst image must work. Otherwise, > we're blaming the user for our bugs. > > 2) What you get going through either path should be identical; > installing from the network shouldn't put you into a > choose-your-own-adventure path of selecting desktops and optional > server components. > > This may be more aspirational for F21 than something we can achieve > this cycle. > > 3) The netinst image should not look like an equal alternative to > the "live" image (which I think is a misnomer) in the web > presentation. Making it seem you need to decide whether you want to > try out Fedora first or just install it is deceptive; generally, > we want people to just go ahead and get the full image. > > I don't have strong opinions about whether we make the netinst > image available at all. My vague feeling is that yes, it should be > available, because it's more similar to a kickstarted installation > of the workstation, which is probably useful have working and > tested to give identical results to the live image installation. > The other thing here is that without a netinstall, it becomes very difficult for a site to do multiple deployments easily. I think we want people to be able to write a PXE-boot installer for Workstation and relying on the live ISO might be an impediment to that.

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 02:46:22PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > 3) The netinst image should not look like an equal alternative to the > "live" image (which I think is a misnomer) in the web presentation. This is a good time to fix misnomers -- what would you rather say?

> I don't have strong opinions about whether we make the netinst image > available at all. My vague feeling is that yes, it should be available, > because it's more similar to a kickstarted installation of the > workstation, which is probably useful have working and tested to give > identical results to the live image installation. And presumably it would be the preferred starting point for workstation kickstart installs.