Bug details: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238292 Information from BlockerBugs App: <img alt="2238292" src="https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/api/v0/bugimg/2238292" />
Commented but haven't voted yet: coremodule
The votes have been last counted at 2023-09-11 18:09 UTC and the last processed comment was #comment-873631
To learn how to vote, see: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review A quick example: BetaBlocker +1 (where the tracker name is one of BetaBlocker/FinalBlocker/BetaFE/FinalFE/0Day/PreviousRelease and the vote is one of +1/0/-1)
BetaBlocker +1
BetaBlocker
FinalBlocker
BetaFE
FinalFE
0Day
PreviousRelease
+1
0
-1
BetaBlocker -1
(at least for now)
The cited criterion is about btrfs volumes, not subvolumes, as I understand it. If a user can delete a volume with subvolumes, I don't feel like taking this as a Beta Blocker.
The cited criterion is about btrfs volumes, not subvolumes
Well, I think that criterion is trying to be completely specific about the details. See that it talks about "LVM volumes", but it doesn't specify PVs, VGs and LVs, which are the technical details of making LVM work. Similarly, while you can use btrfs without subvolumes, the general usage is to use them (you only get a worse experience if you don't), and they're the implementation detail like PVs/VGs/LVs. From my POV, the criterion wouldn't make any sense for btrfs if we disregarded subvolumes. For example, there would be no way to instruct anaconda to install into a new subvolume, because you want to keep the existing subvolume (of your previous OS) as a backup. Or no way to make disk space by deleting an existing subvolume.
I think I'm currently closer to BetaBlocker +1
but I can imagine we could write a Common Issue about this ("please edit subvolumes in advance with a different tool"), if people didn't agree with me. But then I think this should definitely be taken as a final blocker.
For me this is a clear blocker, since it really violates the Custom_partitioning criteria.
AGREED AcceptedBetaBlocker
Discussed during the 2023-09-11 blocker review meeting: [0]
The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedBlocker (Beta)" was made as it violates the following criterion:
"The installer must be able to: Correctly interpret, and modify as described below, any disk ... containing ... btrfs volumes".
[0] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2023-09-11/f39-blocker-review.2023-09-11-16.00.txt
The following votes have been closed:
Metadata Update from @blockerbot: - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Release F39 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.
Log in to comment on this ticket.