On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 14:52 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 13:10 +0100, Vratislav Podzimek wrote: > > > And to sum it up a bit -- I think this feature doesn't complicate things > > for users who want to ignore it or who don't understand it. If you think > > it does, please tell me about it and I'll do my best to fix it. On the > > other hand, if somebody wants to care about security policies, they have > > an easy and comfortable choice. > > Unfortunately, I don't think this is quite right. > > As I understand it, it's fairly well established that if people see a UI > element, they - or, at least, an appreciable amount of them - will want > to interact with it, or at least understand it. *Some* people may follow > this thought process: > > Path 1 > ------ > > "Oh, hey, there's this thing here." > "Hum. I don't understand it at all." > "Well, I guess I'll just ignore it and carry on." > > which is what you're assuming, and would give an okay outcome. However, > I think it's fairly well known that quite a lot of people will follow > this one: > > Path 2 > ------ > > "Oh, hey, there's this thing here." > "Hum. I don't understand it at all." > "Well, crap. I'm installing an OS. That's a pretty major operation. I > think I'd better understand everything that's going on before I carry > on." > <clickety> > "Huh. content...policy...profile? What is all this stuff about? What > does it mean? What should I do?" > > This one goes one of about three ways. If we're really lucky: > > "Well, I guess I'd better go read the docs." > <reads docs> > "That was a clear, short and cogent explanation! I learned something, an > now I can continue!" > > If we're less lucky: > > "I guess I'll go Google around and see if I find something useful. Jeez, > why does this have to be so complicated?" > > If we're less lucky: > > "Man, screw this crap, if I have to go read an encyclopaedia just to get > it installed, I'll go do something else". > > And finally, some people will probably follow this one: > > Path 3 > ------ > > "Oh, hey, there's this thing here." > "Hum. I don't understand it at all." > "Well, what the hell, I'm a smart cookie, I'll just power through." > <clickety> > "Hum. Content...policy...profile? I don't really know what any of those > things are. But reading is hard. I'll just make some sensible-looking > guesses!" > <clickety> > > I suspect you can figure out the possible outcomes of path 3. ;) Well, I still believe that if we had good content in the SSG, "sensible-looking guesses" and the addon was able to show rules defined by profiles (which is a planned feature for the next release), it would be quite an easy choice for the user.
-- Vratislav Podzimek Anaconda Rider | Red Hat, Inc. | Brno - Czech Republic -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
