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

Re: OS-Installer package



I just did a quick local build and a dummy install. The interface looks polished (GTK + libadwaita). While this is still very beta software, the overall installation process is very smooth (I only tested a dummy install). In my opinion this installer would be especially nice for the live system/people new to linux/debian. The installer also requires some GNOME programs such as disks and settings. This wouldn't be such a big issue since the standard DE for the live system is also GNOME afiak. While this would favour GNOME, there still could be an option/a selector to install other DEs like KDE/Mint/XFCE. I haven't really looked into a custom configuration for os-installer. 
My conclusion is this would make a polished, nice looking, easy-to-use (and accessible) installer. It would only make sense for a live install; the graphical obviously should keep d-i.

Cheers

Matthias Geiger (werdahias) 


28. Aug. 2022, 03:25 von rclobus@rclobus.nl:
Hello Matthias, Илья,

On 18/08/2022 07:27, matthias.geiger1024@tutanota.de wrote:
recently I came across OS-Installer: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/p3732/os-installer> It's UI is GTK-based and it's written in Python. There has only been one intial release a year ago. With that in mind, should I start working on a debian Package for it ? The current installer for live is the calmares one afaik. I think this is at least worth thinking about. Let me know what you think

I've created a bug report about the accessibility of Calamares [1]

Could you describe which features of OS-Installer would be killer-features compared to Calamares?
I haven't looked at OS-Installer yet, but I know that in Calamares quite a few tricky installer issues have been solved.
In general it is not easy to have an installer that is easy to use (for the general audience, because d-i is for the technical audience).

With kind regards,
Roland Clobus

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1018281


Reply to: