In a recent post, anaconda developer Will Woods provided the amazing statistic that:
about 90% of the Anaconda codebase was rewritten over 2 Fedora release cycles
This means that as well as having refreshed installer interface (aka newUI), the underlying code is cleaner, and easier to maintain.
usability suffers. one, partition layout is hidden… plus no graphical layout of what partition look like instead we get tree display of partitions thats like one small step up the usual dos way of displaying partitions. it’s like freebsd layout. that’s bad…
also, no choice to select hostname. no selection of UTC clock. cleaning up code is fine by me but not at the expense of
broken installation for people. some people who dont visually see partition layout graphically, will be scared of installing the freedom os and will abort it.
You can set hostname on the Network spoke. The code to use localtime for the hwclock when Windows is installed returns in F19.
Just a heads up, I am not an anaconda developer.
I was just pointing a link of an anaconda developer’s blog post. Therefore, your feedback here is probably not going to be heard by the people that you want to hear it.
There are plenty of ways to provide feedback and get information about Anaconda.
This post i did a while back has a bunch of links about the design of the UI:
https://ryanlerch.org/blog/the-anaconda-interface-redesign/
Also, filing a bug with detailed information is also a good place to start getting involved. The anaconda team is one of the best teams for staying on top of their bugzilla queue too, so that’s a bonus!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora
There is also the anaconda-devel mailing list:
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
You can also jump into #anaconda in IRC on freenode too.
+======|=======|=======|
| ntfs | ext3 | |
|======|=======|=======| is better than
+dev/sda1 ntfs
|
+dev/sda2 ext3
|
- free space
you get my point.
You’re making the mistake many people make, which is only thinking about *your* use case. That works fine for raw partitions on simple disks. It’s not a great system for representing storage containers (LVM, btrfs), or redundant storage (RAID, btrfs again) or some types of enterprise storage. We need a useful and usable way of handling *all* types of storage, not just the ones you use.
as one who _does_ use btrfs, I do find the lack of options on the partitioning (especially btrfs subvolumes) to be peculiarly frustrating for fedora.
However, I do like the hub-based layout. The individual spokes (if I understand correctly) can be improved much easier than before. I look forward to FC19 and beyond to see the improvments to anaconda from that usability standpoint
The New anaconda UI is not that much promissing. I feels like a lot easier for creating partitions. But there is no visual display of partitions in HDD. I dont know whether this fedora will erase my windows. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/UX_Redesign/Anaconda_Visual_Design this looks awesome but we get a much bad one. If the design looks like firstboot interface then also it be better. waiting for more updations in the UI design