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

Re: (forw) Switch to graphical installer by default?

Quoting Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org):
> Christian PERRIER <bubulle@debian.org> (08/07/2012):
> > I think the discussion made the decision and is actually a GO to
> > switch to g-i as default, right?
> I'm pretty happy to see people want to work on this. Really.
> However I'm a little sad this kind of heavy changes is kept for after
> the freeze, and long after the call for comments for beta 1.

It seems that the only needed changes are on debian-cd side.

> Can somebody please write a summary of the needed changes (meaning at
> least the involved packages)?

AFAIK no package impacted.

> I'm tempted to call it way too late for beta 1, and to ask for its being
> considered for a beta 2 or rc 1 only. Or just wheezy+1. We're 1.5 year
> after the squeeze release; surely there was plenty of time to think
> about doing this earlier.

Well, I'm afraid we have to live with the fact that less and less
people care about d-i during the development process (I also reduced
my own involvment, so I'm among these "people" too).

But there's indeed nothing we can really change about that. *Still* we
have a bit more people working on D-I right now, this is kind of a
consolation, isn't it?

So, well, there might be a risk but it's not like g-i isn't tested,
isn't it?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: