-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Alberto Passalacqua wrote:
It's just postponing the "problem". :-) For me it rather seems to "offer a solution if there is a problem". In an ideal world, there is no problem to solve, in the other ones we will provide a possibility to correct what was wrong.
BTW: there is still a solution if an automatic proposal fails: Installation can still check what has failed and offer user manual tuning in that case (at the end of the first stage).
Now I'm confused. Let's try to explain :-)
If the installer will allow the user to tune everything at the end of the first stage in case something "goes wrong", I don't see the improvement. It's just before the reboot instead then after.
Currently, the second stage configuration is moved to the end of the first stage but it doesn't provide any feedback to a user. The current implementation is: 1.) make a proposal 2.) write it (both silently). First, what I plan, is to provide some feedback by running this functionality using a progress SCR agent that enables inter process communication. The (questionable) improvement now is that you don't have to: a) wait for the second stage to have your hardware, network configured ... b) click [Next] in every proposal or other dialogs (because second stage just doesn't exist) and thus there is no [Next] button ...
I also wonder how you can check that things like printer, network, tv card work before you have a complete installation, so I don't understand how you can "check" what failed.
I can check whether some hardware was found but that we were unable to find a driver for it, for instance. Proposals return special `warning or `blocker flags in case of problem. In these cases, we can re-enable those steps where problems occurred and let user choose what to do.
To add some consideration, I think that the idea of cleaning up the installation process, which was considered too long, and not too complex by users, at least in my experience on IRC, is good. But it seems to me that the proposed solutions add complexity instead of removing it, by just moving configuration options to a more hidden location or postponing the configuration.
Not necessary, just for developers :) Users can choose whether they want to go the auto- or the manual-way.
Anyway, I hope to see the new version in action in alpha 3, so we can talk again after a test :-)
Hmm, deadline is Friday :) We shall see... Bye Lukas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH1a5kVSqMdRCqTiwRApyhAJ0fOqcoT8/dlTAQzTpFs1hqFox7+gCeOcii rGQgetLAvVCO49fglvygjFw= =r+AF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org