On 1/29/20 10:25 AM, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:
- YaST Disk
starts at "Available storage on *" and I never found it any
useful as it contains everything mixed together
BTW, we improved a bit that view in the latest sprint (still not visible
in Tumbleweed) so all devices can be managed directly from there thanks
to the contextual buttons.
OK, good to have those buttons, but I still see it "a bit" overfilled
with content. My "Available storage *" contains 10 items: two disks,
LVM. Imagine an overview with RAID, LVM, three disks...
probably really expect
- To see only disks, when I click on Hard Disks
- To go directly to partitions when selecting a disk
Always? Also for hard disks that are formatted directly (without
partition table) or fully empty?
Good question if I hadn't written "Obviously all this comes from
use-cases." a few lines below :D For my use-case, yes.
Same question applies to software RAIDs, that
traditionally were used as
"virtual partitions" (i.e. formatted directly) but since storage-ng can
also be partitioned (so they are seen more like "virtual disks" now).
Would you also expect to land in "partitions" for them? In that regard,
I couldn't say which one of the use-cases (formatting them or
partitioning) is more common or more useful .
Maybe the problem is that we call it "Partitions" while we actually show
"how the disk is divided into partitions (or not)" ;) We should not
stick to old naming especially as we currently allow more than in the
past where we were (most probably) just working with partitions.
And same question applies to Bcache devices, that
(like disks and
RAIDs), can also be formatted/mounted directly or partitioned. Would
"partitions" also be your expected tab there?
I don't have any expectations there as I don't use btrfs myself.
this comes from use-cases. You have a different use-case
when installing a machine and different use case when you want to tune
your partitioning or get more info about disks/partitions on your
Of course, there are more ideas that I'd write here just after seeing
the partitioner after a few weeks without using it but this is
Yes, the whole think needs to be redesigned from the ground. But we
still lack that new "vision" that really rings the bell about how things
I would not dare to say "redesigned", I'd say "rethought".
So, what are my expectations? The UI should be...
1. Understandable for the first sight
2. Based on real use-cases (we need to collect them first)
3. Fewer is more (in meaning: better)
4. But not too few (insufficient)
5. We might need Wizards to setup complex things too
6. Using more UI possibilities if that helps (e.g., Device graph)
Don't let me think
Anyway, please, don't get me wrong. I believe that the team does a great
job making the YaST Disk better and better and especially I do thank
Ancor for driving that thing! :)
Lukas Ocilka, Systems Management Team Leader & YaST Product Owner
SLE Department, SUSE Linux
🌍 It's not too late to changee ourselves ⧖
☂ Handle with care - Your reply can be stored in the cloud
🎃 IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only.
If you have received this email by mistake, please, notify the
sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to anyone
or make copies of thereof.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner(a)opensuse.org