Re: [Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Sat, 2003-06-21 at 20:51, Reinout van Schouwen wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 10:33:27 -0500, w9ya wrote: > > >> - -It would be nice if by default rpmdrake would show software that is > >> installed. IMHO, there should be an options dialog, which has things > >> like "show installed software in searches". > >> > >> Is there any reason why installed software can not be under a seperate > >> branch of the tree view? > > > > Any reason it can't be in the same program, from a user's perspective ? > > Talking from a user's perspective- my assumption would be that a typical > user wouldn't see the need to start one program to add or remove another > program. > > Again this is just my gut feeling, but I've seen anecdotical evidence that > as far as a user is concerned, when a program isn't on the desktop or > menu, it doesn't exist. My conclusion: don't bother with the extra step of > graphical software (de-)installers, why don't we just transparently > install / remove software based on what the user indicates he wants in his > menu or on the desktop? Of course there are gotchas with this approach, > for instance, the user should be able to edit his menu without having the > permissions to install/remove software. But this could also be handled > transparently. Next to this it would have to be extremely easy to add > programs. I envision the 'What to do?' menu always containing the common > choices and when a user clicks a not yet installed application, then a > installer should pop up explaining that it needs to download something, > please wait, or that it needs the installation CD. Attractive but not practical. Firstly...we're talking about intuition...yet the implication of "what the user indicates he wants in his menu" is that you open the *menu editor* to install software. That is not intuitive, to me. The other idea, that the menus would contain all possible software and install whatever you click on...erm...have you thought how BIG the menus would be? Not to mention what to do about packages that wouldn't naturally have a menu entry. -- adamw
[Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 01:38:57 +0200, Pierre Jarillon wrote: > Often newbies ask "How to launch ?". Yes, sometimes this will take some exploring. An area to work on. > They ask too "where is the .exe ?" It can't be a real newbie asking that. It can only be a user who is mentally deformed by too much windos-exposure. -- Reinout
[Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 10:33:27 -0500, w9ya wrote: >> - -It would be nice if by default rpmdrake would show software that is >> installed. IMHO, there should be an options dialog, which has things >> like "show installed software in searches". >> >> Is there any reason why installed software can not be under a seperate >> branch of the tree view? > > Any reason it can't be in the same program, from a user's perspective ? Talking from a user's perspective- my assumption would be that a typical user wouldn't see the need to start one program to add or remove another program. Again this is just my gut feeling, but I've seen anecdotical evidence that as far as a user is concerned, when a program isn't on the desktop or menu, it doesn't exist. My conclusion: don't bother with the extra step of graphical software (de-)installers, why don't we just transparently install / remove software based on what the user indicates he wants in his menu or on the desktop? Of course there are gotchas with this approach, for instance, the user should be able to edit his menu without having the permissions to install/remove software. But this could also be handled transparently. Next to this it would have to be extremely easy to add programs. I envision the 'What to do?' menu always containing the common choices and when a user clicks a not yet installed application, then a installer should pop up explaining that it needs to download something, please wait, or that it needs the installation CD. Descending back to reality, -- Reinout
[Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:39:48 +0200, dann wrote: > I want to find a program for emailing. What do you do? -> Install > software -> search description for "email"-> Nothing found! > User thinks: WTF? > Smarter user starts (ironically and contra-intuitive) software removal, > finds kmail/evolution, thinks: ahh...I already have such a program, it is > called kmail! Than he has to hope that the menu name corresponds with the > rpm name (another Feature request: make the menu name clearly visible in > rpmdrake, this will imediatly suggest what menu item is connected with > the package). I have to agree with Danny. I'll even go as far to say that rpmdrake should match the 'what to do?' functionality and not require prior knowledge of package names at all. -- Reinout van Schouwen
Re: [Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
On Friday 20 June 2003 13:34, Michael Scherer wrote: > On Friday 20 June 2003 12:51, Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote: > > Maybe providing synaptic with MDK could solve the request for > > another interface for these things. Is there a possiblility to do > > that? I know that synaptic uses a special database of packages that > > you need to set up at some repository, but I have done that for > > redhat and it is not a big deal. So what would it take to provide > > synaptic, eg in the contrib section? > > yes, synaptics srpm is ready, just wait on apt-get on cooker. > I will upload a spec somewhere tonight. http://scherer.michael.free.fr/synaptic-0.35.1-1mdk.src.rpm It should build cleanly on a 9.1 system. If i have time, i will try to update apt-get on cooker. -- Michaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
On Friday 20 June 2003 12:51, Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote: > Maybe providing synaptic with MDK could solve the request for another > interface for these things. Is there a possiblility to do that? I > know that synaptic uses a special database of packages that you need > to set up at some repository, but I have done that for redhat and it > is not a big deal. So what would it take to provide synaptic, eg in > the contrib section? yes, synaptics srpm is ready, just wait on apt-get on cooker. I will upload a spec somewhere tonight. -- Michaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
Maybe providing synaptic with MDK could solve the request for another interface for these things. Is there a possiblility to do that? I know that synaptic uses a special database of packages that you need to set up at some repository, but I have done that for redhat and it is not a big deal. So what would it take to provide synaptic, eg in the contrib section? best regards keld
[Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
1) If you want to participate in Mandrake development, you have to get involved in Cooker. There's no way around that. The only sort of exception to that is the beta process, and the greater Mandrake community had the opportunity to voice their opinion then. 2) Unhappy people bitch, while happy people usually stay quiet. You overrate the "backlash" against the new rpmdrake. I guarantee you more users are happy with the new rpmdrake than not, you just don't hear from the happy ones. As a user happy with the new rpmdrake, I'll take this opportunity to speak up. I couldn't even use rpmdrake until the new one was made. The old one sucked and didn't even work. I hated it. The new one is beautiful. Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > When the "beginner" rpmdrake was introduced, there had been no opinion > polls heralding it's existence to the general population. There had > been no activity or screenshots or sketches of possible UI > configurations listed on the mandrakeclub anywhere. There was no > knowledge among any of the Mandrake kin (non cooker) that anything new > was coming; and therefore there was no chance in hell itself that any > decisions concerning it would involve the public. If I went to newbie, > expert, or Mandrakeclub forums right now and asked any of them had > participated in a beginner research program to create a "beginner" > rpmdrake to replace the old, or even if any of them had been asked > whether they actually even wanted a replacement or not, exactly how many > people do you think would respond in the affirmative? > > The target audience for rpmdrake is beginners. Yet beginners don't use > cooker. Yet Mandrakesoft polls, mailing lists, and surveys exist for > the purpose of hearing from beginners and users. Yet those resources > were completely unused prior to the rollout of beginner rpmdrake. The > impression is that that had to be on purpose. > > Rewind to 9.0 development cycle. There was an immediate backlash to the > rollout of the beginner rpmdrake replacement. Should we have been > surprised? You might say, "Well, they are going to bitch no matter what > changes were made, so we lose either way". My answer is that no body > can truly bitch about a voted decision because that is the maximum > position of strength. And if they do, then they are still wrong and the > commonsense majority will recognize the wrongness. But that's naturally > not what we have here. So the users used the only outlet that they had > for their frustrations at the time of 9.0, which were the rpm voting > polls. The power of public opinion was vast as the "standard" rpmdrake > poll rocketed to the top of the total poll list, which is prioritized in > order of votes cast. There were only perhaps four polls above it. > Actions taken? Responses? None. > > Fast forward to 9.1 development cycle. This is when I myself started > paying attention, since I had begun distributing cooker cd's, and I also > had bravely and somewhat foolishly moved my production rig to 9.1 cooker > in a blind act of faith. Beginner rpmdrake hit me like a ton of > bricks. Other disgruntled users (not me) again implemented a "standard" > rpmdrake UI poll on Mandrakeclub rpm poll section, and again it's > popularity was phenomenal. Once more it rocketed to the first priority > page number one, completely unopposed, page one being one out of about > 17 or 18 pages at the time, if memory serves. Again there were only a > bare handful of polls above it. Actions taken? None. Responses? None. > Explanations to the general public as to what was going on? None. > Basically confusion reigned supreme. It is true as Buchan pointed out > that a handful of more knowledgable Club members went to Cooker and > complained, but their voices went basically unacted upon regarding the > real differences between beginner and standard rpmdrake. > > Fast forward to about a month before Deno decided to leave > Mandrakesoft. The 9.0 and 9.1 "standard" rpmdrake polls were shut down > and thus rendered invisible to the general public, stifling further > forum conversation within those polls. Again there was no explanation > given other than an answer I posed to the Club about the problem. I was > basically told that we needed to migrate because the beginner rpmdrake > was "better". > > So, that's it. You might continue to say that yes, users do have > input. Perhaps that is true to a very limited degree, but it's barely > just true enough to be able to make that statement. At least in the > case of rpmdrake. The questions in my mind remain: If the user > interface's cosmetics and design are for the users at large then why > arent users at large questioned and polled regarding the user > interface's cosmetics and design. If the Club money is supposed to give > your vote a priority over other users and a voice in the Club regarding > development then why is it that your Club money does not give your vote > a priority over
[Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Buchan Milne wrote: > But while we are talking about virtual packages, I would like to know > how I can require one of kdebase, gnome-utils, cdialog, Xdialog, or > (possibly) zenity. I haven't updated the cursor-themes package because > of this. It works well with kdialog (in kdebase), gdialog (in > gnome-utils) and Xdialog (which is in contrib), and has a few updated > themes, but I don't want to require GNOME users to install kdebase, or > KDE users to install gnome-utils ... Well, once fpons gets the fixed rpm uploaded (that won't uninstall a package if you install another one that provides the same thing), you can have kdebase, gnome-utils, and Xdialog all provide something (like xdialog) and have your package require it. Then if you urpmi your package, it will ask which of the 3 packages someone wants to satisfy the dependency (if they don't already have one of the three).
[Cooker] Re: rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
It was never claimed that the MandrakeClub was an organization that would give its members democratic control over MandrakeSoft. Bottom line is no development process, commercial or open-source, is democratic. They're all tyrannical, because that's the only way anything is ever going to get done. End of discussion on that topic. As far as feedback from the club, it's useful to see what the users think sometimes. How that feedback is used is at the developers' discretion; end of that discussion too. Lyvim Xaphir wrote: lots of stupid stuff [paraphrase]
