Re: Fedora 11 : Download Link Not Working
On 2009-07-09 05:12:31 PM, Saurabh Sharma wrote: > Clicking i386 - Install DVD on > http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-all > gives us 403,please resolve asap Hi, we're reporting this to the mirror now, until then you should be able to obtain it at ftp://fedora.iitm.ac.in/linux/fedora/releases/11/Fedora/i386/iso/Fedora-11-i386-DVD.iso. Thanks, Ricky pgpXjqbzAX9n4.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Fedora 11 : Download Link Not Working
On 2009-07-09 05:12:31 PM, Saurabh Sharma wrote: > Clicking i386 - Install DVD on > http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-all > gives us 403,please resolve asap Hi, sorry for the extra email - can you tell us if it is still happening for you right now? If so, what IP are you requesting that from? Thanks, Ricky pgpxCUFjNeclX.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Websites Meeting - 2009-07-10 at 17:00 UTC
Hey, this is a reminder for the weekly meeting in #fedora-websites on Freenode, as usually, See you all there! Thanks, Ricky pgpND4JQdFlH1.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Websites Meeting - 2009-07-10 at 17:00 UTC
I cannot be there as the net here is down from the past two days. But i would like you people to talk about the user gallery with mizmo. Regards, Hiemanshu Sharma On 10/07/2009, Ricky Zhou wrote: > Hey, this is a reminder for the weekly meeting in #fedora-websites on > Freenode, as usually, See you all there! > > Thanks, > Ricky > -- Regards, Hiemanshu Sharma. -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Checksum validation instructions for Windows
Hi. There are instructions for ISO checksum validation on Windows available at http://docs.fedoraproject.org/readme-burning-isos/en_US/sn-validating-files.html Maybe it would be a good idea to add link to Microsoft's own SHA1/MD5 calculator (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=B3C93558-31B7-47E2-A663-7365C1686C08). I've recently met a bit paranoid guy who complained on an Internet forum that he can't verify Fedora ISO checksum on his Windows system because your site doesn't provide any Windows utility for that and instead it only points to some 3rd party tools, which he doesn't trust. Regards, MP -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Websites Meeting - 2009-07-10 at 17:00 UTC
On 2009-07-10 02:36:36 PM, Hiemanshu Sharma wrote: > I cannot be there as the net here is down from the past two days. But > i would like you people to talk about the user gallery with mizmo. Sure thing, do you have any particular questions we should bring up? Thanks, Ricky pgpmT7dhuwsNg.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Websites Meeting - 2009-07-10 at 17:00 UTC
On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 10:34 -0400, Ricky Zhou wrote: > Hey, this is a reminder for the weekly meeting in #fedora-websites on > Freenode, as usually, See you all there! I can't make it this week because of a business meeting. :( I have been working on a mockup/redesign for get-fedora based on user feedback but it's not quite complete yet. ~m -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Checksum validation instructions for Windows
Hi Michał, Michał Pecio wrote: > There are instructions for ISO checksum validation on Windows > available at > > http://docs.fedoraproject.org/readme-burning-isos/en_US/sn-validating-files.html > > Maybe it would be a good idea to add link to Microsoft's own > SHA1/MD5 calculator > (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=B3C93558-31B7-47E2-A663-7365C1686C08). > I've recently met a bit paranoid guy who complained on an Internet > forum that he can't verify Fedora ISO checksum on his Windows system > because your site doesn't provide any Windows utility for that and > instead it only points to some 3rd party tools, which he doesn't > trust. From a quick look, it doesn't appear that the MS tool can verify SHA-256 checksums, which is what Fedora 11 and newer use (the burning ISOs document needs to be updated, the documentation team is aware of and working on that). It's rather unfortunate that there is such a lack of quality tools for performing checksum verification available on the Windows platform. I can understand someone being averse to trusting a third party verification tool, but at the same time, if that person is running Windows they most certainly have much more to worry about. :) If you know of a reasonably trusted tool that can verify SHA-256 checksums on Windows, we'd be very interested to hear about it. -- ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~ Reason obeys itself; and ignorance does whatever is dictated to it. -- Thomas Paine pgpS5M9Mrb17g.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Websites Meeting - 2009-07-10 at 17:00 UTC
On 2009-07-10 10:40:46 AM, Máirín Duffy wrote: > I can't make it this week because of a business meeting. :( I have been > working on a mockup/redesign for get-fedora based on user feedback but > it's not quite complete yet. Awesome! We look forward to seeing how some of the x86_64/KDE issues can be solved. I guess you can Hiemanshu can find each other on IRC to talk about the user gallery sometime. Thanks, Ricky pgp0lfcBxPlkI.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Checksum validation instructions for Windows
You can link and use HashCalc. Its a trusted software and i have been using it for quite some while on my other computers. Regards, Hiemanshu sharma On 10/07/2009, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Hi Michał, > > Michał Pecio wrote: >> There are instructions for ISO checksum validation on Windows >> available at >> >> http://docs.fedoraproject.org/readme-burning-isos/en_US/sn-validating-files.html >> >> Maybe it would be a good idea to add link to Microsoft's own >> SHA1/MD5 calculator >> (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=B3C93558-31B7-47E2-A663-7365C1686C08). >> I've recently met a bit paranoid guy who complained on an Internet >> forum that he can't verify Fedora ISO checksum on his Windows system >> because your site doesn't provide any Windows utility for that and >> instead it only points to some 3rd party tools, which he doesn't >> trust. > > From a quick look, it doesn't appear that the MS tool can verify > SHA-256 checksums, which is what Fedora 11 and newer use (the burning > ISOs document needs to be updated, the documentation team is aware of > and working on that). > > It's rather unfortunate that there is such a lack of quality tools for > performing checksum verification available on the Windows platform. > > I can understand someone being averse to trusting a third party > verification tool, but at the same time, if that person is running > Windows they most certainly have much more to worry about. :) > > If you know of a reasonably trusted tool that can verify SHA-256 > checksums on Windows, we'd be very interested to hear about it. > > -- > ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp > ~~ > Reason obeys itself; and ignorance does whatever is dictated to it. > -- Thomas Paine > > -- Regards, Hiemanshu Sharma. -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Fedora-websites-list Digest, Vol 45, Issue 13
I have applied to websites group , but I'm still " unapproved".Is there any other things to do I may be missing? On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:00 PM, wrote: > Send Fedora-websites-list mailing list submissions to >fedora-websites-list@redhat.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >fedora-websites-list-requ...@redhat.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at >fedora-websites-list-ow...@redhat.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Fedora-websites-list digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Websites Meeting - 2009-07-10 at 17:00 UTC (Ricky Zhou) > 2. Re: Checksum validation instructions for Windows > (Hiemanshu Sharma) > > > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:47:31 -0400 > From: Ricky Zhou > Subject: Re: Websites Meeting - 2009-07-10 at 17:00 UTC > To: fedora-websites-list@redhat.com > Message-ID: <20090710144731.ge3...@alpha.rzhou.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On 2009-07-10 10:40:46 AM, Máirín Duffy wrote: > > I can't make it this week because of a business meeting. :( I have been > > working on a mockup/redesign for get-fedora based on user feedback but > > it's not quite complete yet. > Awesome! We look forward to seeing how some of the x86_64/KDE issues > can be solved. I guess you can Hiemanshu can find each other on IRC to > talk about the user gallery sometime. > > Thanks, > Ricky > -- next part -- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 197 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-websites-list/attachments/20090710/8424d282/attachment.bin > > -- > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:54:45 + > From: Hiemanshu Sharma > Subject: Re: Checksum validation instructions for Windows > To: Todd Zullinger > Cc: webmas...@fedoraproject.org, Micha? Pecio > Message-ID: ><5efedeb10907100754p542e2d71ye0c99c80b448f...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > You can link and use HashCalc. Its a trusted software and i have been > using it for quite some while on my other computers. > > Regards, > > Hiemanshu sharma > > On 10/07/2009, Todd Zullinger wrote: > > Hi MichaÅ‚, > > > > MichaÅ‚ Pecio wrote: > >> There are instructions for ISO checksum validation on Windows > >> available at > >> > >> > http://docs.fedoraproject.org/readme-burning-isos/en_US/sn-validating-files.html > >> > >> Maybe it would be a good idea to add link to Microsoft's own > >> SHA1/MD5 calculator > >> ( > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=B3C93558-31B7-47E2-A663-7365C1686C08 > ). > >> I've recently met a bit paranoid guy who complained on an Internet > >> forum that he can't verify Fedora ISO checksum on his Windows system > >> because your site doesn't provide any Windows utility for that and > >> instead it only points to some 3rd party tools, which he doesn't > >> trust. > > > > From a quick look, it doesn't appear that the MS tool can verify > > SHA-256 checksums, which is what Fedora 11 and newer use (the burning > > ISOs document needs to be updated, the documentation team is aware of > > and working on that). > > > > It's rather unfortunate that there is such a lack of quality tools for > > performing checksum verification available on the Windows platform. > > > > I can understand someone being averse to trusting a third party > > verification tool, but at the same time, if that person is running > > Windows they most certainly have much more to worry about. :) > > > > If you know of a reasonably trusted tool that can verify SHA-256 > > checksums on Windows, we'd be very interested to hear about it. > > > > -- > > ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: > > www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp<http://www.pobox.com/%7Etmz/pgp> > > ~~ > > Reason obeys itself; and ignorance does whatever is dictated to it. > > -- Thomas Paine > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > > Hiemanshu Sharma. > > > > -- > > -- > Fedora-websites-list mailing list > Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list > > > End of Fedora-websites-list Digest, Vol 45, Issue 13 > > -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Meeting Log - 2009-07-10
/me still needs to learn to use meetbot - sorry about missing that this week :-) 17:00 -!- ricky changed the topic of #fedora-websites to: Fedora Websites Meeting - Who's here? 17:00 * markg85 is here 17:00 * ricky had a feeling this was going to be a quick one :-) 17:00 < hiran> hiran is here. 17:02 < ricky> hiran: Hey, are you new around the websites team? 17:02 < hiran> ricky : ya 17:02 < markg85> hiran, welcome ^_^ 17:02 < ricky> Cool, welcome 17:02 < hiran> Thanks All 17:03 < ricky> OK, I guess let's get started 17:03 -!- ricky changed the topic of #fedora-websites to: Fedora Websites Meeting - Tasks 17:03 < ricky> OK, so any updates on tasks for this week? 17:03 < markg85> o yea 17:04 < ricky> Go ahead :-) 17:05 < markg85> Well it was requested that feedback on fedoraproject.org and get.fp.o was gathered by me, hiemanshu and mizmo and i did it :) 17:05 < markg85> quite a lot of feedback actually 17:06 < markg85> so a link to it: 17:06 * markg85 looks for it 17:06 < markg85> http://fedora.mageprojects.com/fedora_feedback_anonymized.txt 17:07 < ricky> Cool - hopefully that'll be useful for the work mizmo was looking at with get-fedora 17:07 < ricky> She couldn't make this meeting, so we'll probably get updated on that next meeting or via the mailing list 17:08 < markg85> mizmo and i where looking at get-fedora and hiemanshu and i where looking at the main fedora page (or am i wrong now?) 17:08 < ricky> That sounds right 17:08 < ricky> OK - so quick update on the blogs.fp.o work that nb|away has been working on 17:09 < ricky> I think that's currently waiting on FAS auth and that's it 17:09 < ricky> There's at least a partial auth plugin that exists now, but it still has a lot of bugs to be worked out 17:10 * ianweller is here 17:10 < markg85> it's quite hard for me to get any further on those 2 sites now 17:10 < ricky> Busy with life? :-) 17:10 < markg85> i guess we need to discuss what's in the feedback but the persons required for that are not here 17:10 < ricky> ianweller: Hey 17:11 < ricky> markg85: Yeah, these past two weeks have been really busy for a lot of people 17:11 < markg85> ianweller, hi 17:11 < ricky> Feel free to ping on the mailing though 17:11 < ricky> I only have one update on my tasks, from just a few minutes ago :-) 17:11 < markg85> ricky, i would have expected a reply from them in the list where i posted the feedback. no reply yet 17:11 < ricky> I've made the first contact to the docs team about some of the thoughs we had on how docs.fp.o could be improved: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2009-July/msg00057.html 17:12 < ricky> Hopefully that'll be received positively 17:13 < ricky> So any other updates on tasks right now? 17:13 < markg85> nope 17:14 < ricky> All right then 17:14 -!- ricky changed the topic of #fedora-websites to: Fedora Websites Meeting - Open Floor 17:14 < ricky> Does anybody have anything they want to discuss? 17:14 < ricky> I know it's kind ofa small meeting here today 17:14 < ricky> **of a 17:14 < ricky> For those reading the logs: 17:14 < ricky> If this time has started not working for you, we can certainly look at changing times too 17:15 < ricky> So please reply on list if that applies to you 17:15 < markg85> only that i would like 'feedback' on the feedback i gathered ^_^ 17:15 < ricky> markg85: What I'd do is post a couple of questions about the feedback in response to your original post 17:15 < ricky> That should get you some responses 17:15 < markg85> will give that i try 17:15 < markg85> a* 17:15 < ricky> Thanks 17:16 < ricky> OK, so if there's nothing else, I'll close the meeting a few minutes 17:16 < ricky> hiran: Did you send a self-intro to list, by the way? 17:16 < hiran> ricky: no 17:17 < ricky> Ah, that'd be good to do when you get a chance so that people know you're here :-) 17:17 < hiran> but i have applied to the website team. 17:18 < ricky> There are a lot of changes being talked about with websites now - it's just hard to get everybody together at the same time :-/ 17:18 < markg85> ricky, perhaps send a mail to the list today or tomorrow for the meeting next week? 17:19 < ricky> markg85: Sure, or maybe we can wait a day or two first to see if anybody responds to this week's logs and wants to look at changing the meeting itme 17:19 < ricky> **time 17:19 < ricky> But I'll definitely send it earlier for next week 17:19 < markg85> oke good 17:20 < ricky> Anyway, sorry this one went a bit short. Our meetings seem to always be either 10-15 minutes or >1.5 hours long, depending on how many people are here :-) 17:20 < ricky> Anyway, 17:20 -!- ricky changed the topic of #fedora-websites to: Fedora Websites Meeting - Meeting Close 17:20 * ricky sends logs pgp4DhKVc4wTP.pgp Description: PGP signature -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Meeting Log - 2009-07-10
Well i could not be there due to problems with my internet connection. To me the time is perfect and i have no problems at all. Ricky is there a list or something for changes pending. Mark i will catch you on MSN ASAP. Now that my exams are over as well we can get a lot done. Regards, Hiemanshu Sharma. On 10/07/2009, Ricky Zhou wrote: > /me still needs to learn to use meetbot - sorry about missing that this > week :-) > > 17:00 -!- ricky changed the topic of #fedora-websites to: Fedora Websites > Meeting - Who's here? > 17:00 * markg85 is here > 17:00 * ricky had a feeling this was going to be a quick one :-) > 17:00 < hiran> hiran is here. > 17:02 < ricky> hiran: Hey, are you new around the websites team? > 17:02 < hiran> ricky : ya > 17:02 < markg85> hiran, welcome ^_^ > 17:02 < ricky> Cool, welcome > 17:02 < hiran> Thanks All > 17:03 < ricky> OK, I guess let's get started > 17:03 -!- ricky changed the topic of #fedora-websites to: Fedora Websites > Meeting - Tasks > 17:03 < ricky> OK, so any updates on tasks for this week? > 17:03 < markg85> o yea > 17:04 < ricky> Go ahead :-) > 17:05 < markg85> Well it was requested that feedback on fedoraproject.org > and get.fp.o was gathered by me, hiemanshu and mizmo and i did it :) > 17:05 < markg85> quite a lot of feedback actually > 17:06 < markg85> so a link to it: > 17:06 * markg85 looks for it > 17:06 < markg85> > http://fedora.mageprojects.com/fedora_feedback_anonymized.txt > 17:07 < ricky> Cool - hopefully that'll be useful for the work mizmo was > looking at with get-fedora > 17:07 < ricky> She couldn't make this meeting, so we'll probably get updated > on that next meeting or via the mailing list > 17:08 < markg85> mizmo and i where looking at get-fedora and hiemanshu and i > where looking at the main fedora page (or am i wrong now?) > 17:08 < ricky> That sounds right > 17:08 < ricky> OK - so quick update on the blogs.fp.o work that nb|away has > been working on > 17:09 < ricky> I think that's currently waiting on FAS auth and that's it > 17:09 < ricky> There's at least a partial auth plugin that exists now, but > it still has a lot of bugs to be worked out > 17:10 * ianweller is here > 17:10 < markg85> it's quite hard for me to get any further on those 2 sites > now > 17:10 < ricky> Busy with life? :-) > 17:10 < markg85> i guess we need to discuss what's in the feedback but the > persons required for that are not here > 17:10 < ricky> ianweller: Hey > 17:11 < ricky> markg85: Yeah, these past two weeks have been really busy for > a lot of people > 17:11 < markg85> ianweller, hi > 17:11 < ricky> Feel free to ping on the mailing though > 17:11 < ricky> I only have one update on my tasks, from just a few minutes > ago :-) > 17:11 < markg85> ricky, i would have expected a reply from them in the list > where i posted the feedback. no reply yet > 17:11 < ricky> I've made the first contact to the docs team about some of > the thoughs we had on how docs.fp.o could be improved: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2009-July/msg00057.html > 17:12 < ricky> Hopefully that'll be received positively > 17:13 < ricky> So any other updates on tasks right now? > 17:13 < markg85> nope > 17:14 < ricky> All right then > 17:14 -!- ricky changed the topic of #fedora-websites to: Fedora Websites > Meeting - Open Floor > 17:14 < ricky> Does anybody have anything they want to discuss? > 17:14 < ricky> I know it's kind ofa small meeting here today > 17:14 < ricky> **of a > 17:14 < ricky> For those reading the logs: > 17:14 < ricky> If this time has started not working for you, we can > certainly look at changing times too > 17:15 < ricky> So please reply on list if that applies to you > 17:15 < markg85> only that i would like 'feedback' on the feedback i > gathered ^_^ > 17:15 < ricky> markg85: What I'd do is post a couple of questions about the > feedback in response to your original post > 17:15 < ricky> That should get you some responses > 17:15 < markg85> will give that i try > 17:15 < markg85> a* > 17:15 < ricky> Thanks > 17:16 < ricky> OK, so if there's nothing else, I'll close the meeting a few > minutes > 17:16 < ricky> hiran: Did you send a self-intro to list, by the way? > 17:16 < hiran> ricky: no > 17:17 < ricky> Ah, that'd be good to do when you get a chance so that people > know you're here :-) > 17:17 < hiran> but i have applied to the website team. > 17:18 < ricky> There are a lot of changes being talked about with websites > now - it's just hard to get everybody together at the same time :-/ > 17:18 < markg85> ricky, perhaps send a mail to the list today or tomorrow > for the meeting next week? > 17:19 < ricky> markg85: Sure, or maybe we can wait a day or two first to see > if anybody responds to this week's logs and wants to look at changing the > meeting itme > 17:19 < ricky> **time > 17:19 < ricky> But I'll definitely send it earlier for next week > 17:19 < markg85> oke good > 17:20 < ricky> Anyway, sorry this one went a bit short. Our mee
Re: Feedback gathered for fedoraproject.org and get.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Mark wrote: > Hey, > > It was suggested that i gather feedback on the 2 sites to see what > users experience when they want to download fedora. > Here is the feedback. (file is here incase the format is off: > http://fedora.mageprojects.com/fedora_feedback_anonymized.txt) > And i have anonymized all the feedback because some people asked that > before i started to ask questions. > The feedback below was gathered in a few irc rooms mostly #fedora and > #web. hiemanshu helped me gathering some of the feedback below. > Personal real world feedback is asked from 6 persons but not given > since fedora would't even run on there stock notebooks! > > Feedback fedoraproject.org and get-fedora > > User 1 > - fedora main site > -- no issues, it's fine > > - get.fp.o > -- KDE download is a bit hidden > -- x64 is hidden. users suggestion: perhaps 2 download buttons: > 'download x64' and 'download x32' > -- user said: also add buttons for the dvd versions of tose 2 architectures > -- Make the gnome-kde choosable like on the mandriva download page > -- Ajax popup with download details (distribution, desktop > environment, installation guide etc...) > > After showing the mandriva download style he said he only missed the > architecture option > > User 2 > - fedora main site > -- Misses a big download fedora button, something that attracts the attention > > - get.fp.o > -- Misses a big download fedora button, something that attracts the attention > -- Spins, where do i need them for? remove it! > > User 3 > - fedora main site > -- 'looks oke' > > - get.fp.o > -- More infor on spins rather then just one link > -- keep it simple > -- When asked for an x64 download link: "I don't think it should be > there, as many people would download it, and it wouldn't work on their > non x86_64 machines." > > User 4 > - fedora main site > -- "I've been able to find everything I need on the websites." > > - get.fp.o > -- "I've been able to find everything I need on the websites." > -- "no issues, it was pretty obvious it's the second big button" > -- ""Trying to download x64"" well, it seems harder because I went to > the list of mirrors instead of just instantly getting the download > link > -->also, when I got to the mirror list I had to click on a mirror and > browse to where the iso files are for F11 > -->we're talking 8-9 clicks at least instead of 1x > -->for the 3rd or 4th most common download it would be nice if it > were shorter, but not a big deal to me > -->I'd like it if their was a link directly to the file you wanted on > the mirror (if that is possible or even makes sense) > -->but it would be possible for it to start me off in say > /release/11/Fedora/x86_64 > -->yeah, that would make sense for it to do that after I click on the > filter for F11 x86_64 > -->yep, that seems like it would be better instead of starting at the base > > User 5 > - fedora main site > -- seems OK, everything looks like its working, by preference I like > a bit more of a banner on sites, but thats personal > -- posibly more of a note that its based on the comercial Red Hat distro > > - get.fp.o > -- seems fine to me > > User 6 > - fedora main site > -- if I'm new to linux and need help, do I click docs, wiki, get help, or > what? > -- too much unused white space > > - get.fp.o > -- seems too cluttered > -- leads me to wonder wtf I click on > -- and it lacks consistancy > -- if you have several options, display them in a consistent manner > -->that page has a couple different options in the middle, other > options in a different style on the right (well, i think they are > different) and then other, alternat eoptions at the bottom > -->could it not list all the options in one consistant list, > explaining what each is, with the different download options? > > User 7 > - fedora main site > -- None > > - get.fp.o > -- i guess download button could be bigger, but i noticed it immediately > > User 8 > - fedora main site > -- should have a big "download" button > -- Well, i think user who wants to install something *NIX'y is pretty > advanced to find a download link on the website > > - get.fp.o > -- None > > User 9 > - fedora main site > -- and it should probably have a better link text > -- I mean, imagine reading it; Get Fedora 11 Desktop Edition Now > INSTALLABLE LIVE CD! > > - get.fp.o > -- only thing is the "download now" link might not be obvious as a link > > - Other > -- one last thing; the layout breaks on a small viewport (4-500px wide) > -- should have some minimal width limiter > -- http://w-wins.com/images/brokenlayout.png > > Mixed from: UxerX and UserY (and others) > -- the front-page of fedoraproject.org is a bit non-descript > -- anonymous, if you will > -- since this is mostly about getting people to use it, I'd go for a > more "in your face" approach, have a direct download button on the > front page, larger logo, more "THIS IS FEDORA"
Re: Feedback gathered for fedoraproject.org and get.fedoraproject.org
Wow. This is fantastic, Mark - thanks to you and Hiemanshu for taking the time to go out and get a ton of data! Comments inline. User 4 - fedora main site -- "I've been able to find everything I need on the websites." I wonder how experienced this user was. :) User 5 - fedora main site -- posibly more of a note that its based on the comercial Red Hat distro ...hm, that's a thought, if somewhat backwards - if anything, RHEL is based on Fedora, not the other way around (as I understand it, anyway) - not sure how the current way of showing the Fedora <--> Red Hat connection was chosen (it's currently in a tiny little sponsorship-note footer at the bottom of http://fedoraproject.org/) but I'm sure there's a good reason for it. User 6 - fedora main site -- if I'm new to linux and need help, do I click docs, wiki, get help, or what? +infinity - get.fp.o -- and it lacks consistancy -- if you have several options, display them in a consistent manner -->that page has a couple different options in the middle, other options in a different style on the right (well, i think they are different) and then other, alternat eoptions at the bottom -->could it not list all the options in one consistant list, explaining what each is, with the different download options? Man, this person gives good, concrete feedback. - fedora main site -- and it should probably have a better link text -- I mean, imagine reading it; Get Fedora 11 Desktop Edition Now INSTALLABLE LIVE CD! YES -- one last thing; the layout breaks on a small viewport (4-500px wide) -- should have some minimal width limiter -- http://w-wins.com/images/brokenlayout.png Great point - do we have any heuristics that we're evaluating our sites against, any standard tests we run for sanity? (Making sure it works on a certain list of screen sizes, a certain set of browsers, that kind of thing?) -- if i didn't know what fedora is i wouldn't immediately know what it was This is *incredibly* important. -- most people who visit your site won't want a tour. They want a download link. Really? I wonder if there is a good way we can empirically prove this. --Mel -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Feedback gathered for fedoraproject.org and get.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 22:39 -0400, Mel Chua wrote: > >> - fedora main site > >> -- and it should probably have a better link text > >> -- I mean, imagine reading it; Get Fedora 11 Desktop Edition Now > >> INSTALLABLE LIVE CD! > > YES I'm not following at all... > > >> -- one last thing; the layout breaks on a small viewport (4-500px wide) > >> -- should have some minimal width limiter > >> -- http://w-wins.com/images/brokenlayout.png > > Great point - do we have any heuristics that we're evaluating our sites > against, any standard tests we run for sanity? (Making sure it works on > a certain list of screen sizes, a certain set of browsers, that kind of > thing?) 800x600 and up is reasonable. 400-500 px wide isn't quite as reasonable. > >> -- most people who visit your site won't want a tour. They want a > >> download link. > > Really? I wonder if there is a good way we can empirically prove this. Why would I expend energy to download an operating system if I don't understand what it is I would be getting for the effort? ~m -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
Re: Feedback gathered for fedoraproject.org and get.fedoraproject.org
-- and it should probably have a better link text -- I mean, imagine reading it; Get Fedora 11 Desktop Edition Now INSTALLABLE LIVE CD! YES I'm not following at all... Yeah, I wasn't really clear... Current http://fedoraproject.org site: tiny blue "--> Get Fedora" on the middle of the left side" Compare to, say, http://www.ubuntu.com/ - banner stretching across the top with "Ubuntu 9.04 Desktop Edition / Save time and boot faster / Get productive with the latest apps / Enjoy an improved user experience" and then a high-contrast "Download" (and "Take the Tour") button right below that text. Maybe we don't need *all* that stuff, but it's more descriptive and a lot easier to find. Great point - do we have any heuristics that we're evaluating our sites against, any standard tests we run for sanity? (Making sure it works on a certain list of screen sizes, a certain set of browsers, that kind of thing?) 800x600 and up is reasonable. 400-500 px wide isn't quite as reasonable. That's a totally reasonable minimum bar - I think we just need to make clear somewhere that that *is* the minimum bar, and that problems at lower resolutions are a wontfix. I started https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Heuristics to try and keep track of ideas for this - it's very much a draft, but I'm wondering whether having a good set of rules-of-thumb might help us answer "it breaks in this case, do we care about this case?" questions in the future. Trying to think out loud why someone might have less than 800px width: * Viewing fp.o on a mobile browser is probably an edge case and can be ignored (stats could prove me wrong, though - I wonder how to get access to those stats... maybe Ian might have some ideas) * Someone on an 800+px wide display might have two windows open side-by-side (comparing the Fedora homepage with the Gentoo homepage, or surfing the web on the left side of his/her screen and reading email on the right). This sounds more plausible to me; my laptop is 1024x768 and it's not uncommon for me to have two browser windows side by side, each filling up half my screen (so, accounting for scrollbars and such, somewhere around 500px width each). -- most people who visit your site won't want a tour. They want a download link. Really? I wonder if there is a good way we can empirically prove this. Why would I expend energy to download an operating system if I don't understand what it is I would be getting for the effort? Also thinking off the top of my head... I think a better reason might be "some people will already come to fp.o knowing that they want to dl Fedora, even before taking the tour. Who are they?" * someone (I trust, possibly an Ambassador standing beside me) has already told me I should just download this "Fedora" thing and they'll help me get started * I do understand what I'd be getting; I already know what Fedora is and just need to grab an image file and am easily frustrated by Fitt's Law * some people blithely click on download links first, then figure out what they're getting afterwards. Not that it's a good idea, mind you... but I've watched enough people have this as almost a knee-jerk reaction to a webpage that... I mean, it happens. All my reasoning in this email and my previous one are a lot more hand-wavy conjecturing than I'd like. I need to sit down and learn how to get hold of our actual website stats, so I can base these kinds of statements on Actual Data. --Mel -- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
