Could we please get this answered or proposed on a meeting?

For desktops, I think it can be postponed to a later version. Most custom/manual partitioning users depend on system upgrade. Is it a hassle to have to install Fedora n-1, to have access to current manual partitioning UI, then upgrade to Fedora n? Sure. I think if we admit that it's both a little tedious and a necessary consequence of rollout due to resources - it's OK.

My take on this is similar to separate /home

• We need to enable users to do complicated things, but that's in the realm of the separate custom partitioning / disk setup requirement.
• If the user doesn't know what complicated thing they want to do, we want to strongly push them onto the default path that we've chosen and not give them questions that we know the "right" answer for already. (Especially since these questions would require extensive learning to understand for many users.)

So I don't see any need for this type of question on the guided path and would like any future addition of this be off the main path or even completely disabled for the Workstation installer.

Great point. Thanks for your opinions @otaylor and @chrismurphy .

Great summary, @otaylor - I agree with this.

We know that users have a strong preference about what technology will be used for the partitioning

I'm not entirely convinced by this statement and feel that it needs some scrutiny/nuance. Some users likely have preferences for particular partitioning schemes, but which users and what are their motivations and requirements?

I think the working group agrees on the following:

• we don't want to prominently expose alternatives to the default partitioning scheme
• it should still be possible for users to use an alternative scheme, most likely as part of the assign mount points workflow

(This is more or less what Owen said above.)