On Friday 26 October 2007, Joey Hess wrote: > Frans Pop wrote: > > My thought was that the user should first be allowed to load additional > > CD/DVDs or not and based on that we _could_ change the > > defaults/priority for using a mirror. > > > > OTOH, as you've argued yourself in the past, having additional CDs > > available does not guarantee that all packages you want for (l10n) > > tasks are available. They could still be on a CD in the set _after_ the > > last one you scanned, so having a mirror could still be useful. > > Yes, and also, using a mirror is the more common case than wanting to > load a whole CD set. So I'd suggest turning that around and asking for a > mirror, and if none was used, raising the priority of the CD question. I beg to disagree. As argued above, loading multiple CDs in no way conflicts with using a mirror. IMO we have to always ask both questions. Also, first letting the user scan all CDs and then asking about adding a mirror is a lot more logical than the other way around: a) it seems not very natural to first scan the installation CD, then do other stuff, and then go back to scanning CDs b) it is much more natural to have a user consider: - "OK, I've now scanned this huge pile of CDs; do I still want to use a mirror in addition to that or not?" than: - "hey, they're asking me if I want to use a mirror; do I need one? I probably do as apparently I cannot use this shitload of CDs they let me download and burn..." Properly explaining that they _can_ use the CDs, but we'll ask them later and only if they choose not to use a mirror, seems like totally the wrong way to go about it. Also note that the question to load additional CDs will _not_ be asked for netinst and business card CDs. And we can probably work out something with Sledge so that we also don't ask it (except maybe at medium prio) for KDE/Xfce/multi-arch CDs as after all those are not part of a set.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.