Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 14:16, FACORAT Fabrice wrote: > True. > On top of that we can think a little bit about rpmdrake and linux > system. With linux user can't easily install an app if the app is : > 1°/ a package that requires others libs ? That's exactly what rpmdrake is for. > 2°/ not a rpm provide by mdk ( as others rpms may not work well because > of provides/requires/etc ... pb ) This is not something we should "fix". Instead, users need to understand why it is not in fact a problem. > What about a foreign/not mdk package ? ... urpmi/gurpmi. Why ? because : No. Making it easier to install non-mdk packages is simply making it easier to screw up the system, so make it as hard as possible. > 1°/ It will try to install this package and the required dependencies if > possible. If it failed ... sorry it's linux, not windows. dependencies are not a sufficient safeguard for foreign packages, because of such things as overly fuzzy dependencies (say a Red Hat package just says it needs libxyz, because there's only one version of libxyz in Red Hat, so it installs happily on Mandrake, where there's a completely different version of libxyz, then crashes on run). > 2°/ it simple No. See above. > We try to imitate windows but it's impossible with linux. > On windows you have a file that normally have all that it need inside it > ( dll or static ) and put them in his directory or use standard windows > lib. If you miss something ( seldom ), just grab the right file, most of > the time it's just the new DirectX. > The nightmare with windows was the fact that some apps override some > windows systems dll and of course the registry ( what a mess ). But > besides that install an app was easy. Want a game ? put the CD, > setup.exe and during install process if it need new directX it provide > it for u or u can simply install it. > > On linux ? take the rpm/sh. arf need libGL.x.y-z and your sys have > libGL.x.t-u and several libs depends on it. upgrade ? sometimes some > apps requires specific version of a lib -> no way. The solution ? the > game should provide everything, put this in his own directory or in > /usr/local or in /opt . Linux libs change quickly and often break > compatibility somewhere ( API, ABI for C++, behaviour) because most of > them are not mature yet. You're simply talking about static compilation, which is exactly what commercially distributed, closed-source games for Linux do. It's really far less of a problem than it's made out to be. Quake 3 works perfectly well on Linux, for instance - it just has all the stuff it needs statically compiled into it, you drop a copy on any remotely modern distribution with sufficient hardware and it will run perfectly. > To sum up it's more freedom and openess ( Opensource, free software, ... > ) for less freedom ( use only what your distro provide you if you're a > newbies or else you will have to dig inside things more complicated ) Which is correct for now. Until it's less dangerous to install non-mdk packages, we should not make it easier to do so. Of course, it would be very nice to work towards *making* it less dangerous, but get the two in the right order. :) -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
> > PS : please, no one, no offense, but I'm becoming rather tired to > discuss that point again and again. I think points are > clear, enough time has been lost on that, and we now have > other interesting subjects to discuss. No offense taken, fair answer :) Do the changes, and we will discuss when we can test the new rpmdrake then. Keep the good work. Eric
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Eric Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >Yes, why not having rpmdrake-1 back? :)) > > :) > But actually the solution to make rpmdrake installer search in > installed by default is, finally, exactly what rpmdrake 1 was > doing !! You will have both installed and to-be-installed "exactly", I don't believe so, no. have a look again at rpmdrake1 and rpmdrake2 initial GUI appearance. > packages in the same search list ! > The point was : why would newbies be confused by an interface > that makes the package browsing, and then offers > install/uninstall options ? Don't you think that make the > installed packages appear in the rpmdrake installer even more > confusing ? i don't think so (though once implemented, it can be removed if it really sux). PS : please, no one, no offense, but I'm becoming rather tired to discuss that point again and again. I think points are clear, enough time has been lost on that, and we now have other interesting subjects to discuss. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 FACORAT Fabrice wrote: > Le jeu 26/06/2003 à 10:09, Eric Fernandez a écrit : > > True. > On top of that we can think a little bit about rpmdrake and linux > system. With linux user can't easily install an app if the app is : > 1°/ a package that requires others libs > 2°/ not a rpm provide by mdk ( as others rpms may not work well because > of provides/requires/etc ... pb ) ??? If a package has all it's provides provided by packages available to urpmi, double click on the downloaded rpm, and gurpmi will install everything for you. > > To my mind rpmdrake should move to something like Red Carpert/Click'n > Run but free. it means that rpmdrake should be like a repository package > administration tools. For configured sources it show what is available > and precise if it's installed or not, show information, where they came > from (source, or unknow for external rpms ). > It does, but at present, either installed, or not installed packages (not both). > What about a foreign/not mdk package ? ... urpmi/gurpmi. Why ? because : > > 1°/ It will try to install this package and the required dependencies if > possible. If it failed ... sorry it's linux, not windows. > 2°/ it simple > ??? > We try to imitate windows but it's impossible with linux. > On windows you have a file that normally have all that it need inside it > ( dll or static ) and put them in his directory or use standard windows > lib. If you miss something ( seldom ), just grab the right file, most of > the time it's just the new DirectX. > The nightmare with windows was the fact that some apps override some > windows systems dll and of course the registry ( what a mess ). But > besides that install an app was easy. Want a game ? put the CD, > setup.exe and during install process if it need new directX it provide > it for u or u can simply install it. > You're not clear, but yes, dll hell is one reason we don't like windows. > On linux ? take the rpm/sh. arf need libGL.x.y-z and your sys have > libGL.x.t-u and several libs depends on it. upgrade ? sometimes some > apps requires specific version of a lib -> no way. The solution ? the > game should provide everything, put this in his own directory or in > /usr/local or in /opt . Linux libs change quickly and often break > compatibility somewhere ( API, ABI for C++, behaviour) because most of > them are not mature yet. > *some* libs change rapidly, most that anyone would want to put in proprietary app don't. And such a package should 1)Provide the libs they compiled against 2)Specifically prevent rpm dependencies on these libraries 3)In the %post, check for the required versions, if not, ensure they will be preloaded via LD_LIBRARY_PATH when starting up the app. > We have to cope with this. A distribution should provide an integrated > solution with normally everything that the user will need. If newer > version of prog are available, the user buy new CD set ( or dl iso ) and > upgrade, or if possible the user launch is repository package > administration tools and grab needed package. > Normally the user should not pick rpm outside of what the distro > provides, or pick tar.gz. If the user did it he will have to assume and > cope with this. > > To sum up it's more freedom and openess ( Opensource, free software, ... > ) for less freedom ( use only what your distro provide you if you're a > newbies or else you will have to dig inside things more complicated ) > IMHO, these issues are only of relevance to proprietary apps, and the packages for those apps should know what they are doing. If they don't, that's their problem, not ours. Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+/DA4rJK6UGDSBKcRAj0XAKCsc12NTySH12TV09jthDWRzkEonwCbBrWa FVyVqSFrEqmPdm13rnVR47o= =k5S+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
Le jeu 26/06/2003 à 10:09, Eric Fernandez a écrit : > But actually the solution to make rpmdrake installer search in installed > by default is, finally, exactly what rpmdrake 1 was doing !! You will > have both installed and to-be-installed packages in the same search list ! > The point was : why would newbies be confused by an interface that makes > the package browsing, and then offers install/uninstall options ? Don't > you think that make the installed packages appear in the rpmdrake > installer even more confusing ? True. On top of that we can think a little bit about rpmdrake and linux system. With linux user can't easily install an app if the app is : 1°/ a package that requires others libs 2°/ not a rpm provide by mdk ( as others rpms may not work well because of provides/requires/etc ... pb ) To my mind rpmdrake should move to something like Red Carpert/Click'n Run but free. it means that rpmdrake should be like a repository package administration tools. For configured sources it show what is available and precise if it's installed or not, show information, where they came from (source, or unknow for external rpms ). What about a foreign/not mdk package ? ... urpmi/gurpmi. Why ? because : 1°/ It will try to install this package and the required dependencies if possible. If it failed ... sorry it's linux, not windows. 2°/ it simple We try to imitate windows but it's impossible with linux. On windows you have a file that normally have all that it need inside it ( dll or static ) and put them in his directory or use standard windows lib. If you miss something ( seldom ), just grab the right file, most of the time it's just the new DirectX. The nightmare with windows was the fact that some apps override some windows systems dll and of course the registry ( what a mess ). But besides that install an app was easy. Want a game ? put the CD, setup.exe and during install process if it need new directX it provide it for u or u can simply install it. On linux ? take the rpm/sh. arf need libGL.x.y-z and your sys have libGL.x.t-u and several libs depends on it. upgrade ? sometimes some apps requires specific version of a lib -> no way. The solution ? the game should provide everything, put this in his own directory or in /usr/local or in /opt . Linux libs change quickly and often break compatibility somewhere ( API, ABI for C++, behaviour) because most of them are not mature yet. We have to cope with this. A distribution should provide an integrated solution with normally everything that the user will need. If newer version of prog are available, the user buy new CD set ( or dl iso ) and upgrade, or if possible the user launch is repository package administration tools and grab needed package. Normally the user should not pick rpm outside of what the distro provides, or pick tar.gz. If the user did it he will have to assume and cope with this. To sum up it's more freedom and openess ( Opensource, free software, ... ) for less freedom ( use only what your distro provide you if you're a newbies or else you will have to dig inside things more complicated )
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: "Good idea" was rather refering to showing installed software in searches, not specifically to providing a checkbox option for it. And I said I think best solution would be to do it by default. Why not doing a "browse packages" interface, independent from any install/uninstall consideration, with all information we can find in the install rpmdrake. And then depending on the fact the package is already installed or not, there would be an install/remove button. You may even add Yes, why not having rpmdrake-1 back? :)) :) But actually the solution to make rpmdrake installer search in installed by default is, finally, exactly what rpmdrake 1 was doing !! You will have both installed and to-be-installed packages in the same search list ! The point was : why would newbies be confused by an interface that makes the package browsing, and then offers install/uninstall options ? Don't you think that make the installed packages appear in the rpmdrake installer even more confusing ? Eric
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
"Eric Fernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> -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". > > > >It's a good idea[1] but I still don't see how to integrate well > >an options dialog. I don't want to add a menubar nor a toolbar > >just for that. I was thinking I was going to show installed > >software as well in searches by default, I think it should be ok > >for beginners. > > Yes it is a good idea... and not. If a new checkbox "search for installed > softwares" has to be added to an interface which is especially made for > installing software, it demonstrates there is a problem with the interface, > and reviewers will criticise it. Then why not making appear this button in > the uninstall rpmdrake too ? And I expect so many newbies on the > mandrakeexpert or mailing lists asking why there is such a button. "Good idea" was rather refering to showing installed software in searches, not specifically to providing a checkbox option for it. And I said I think best solution would be to do it by default. > Why not doing a "browse packages" interface, independent from any > install/uninstall consideration, with all information we can find in the > install rpmdrake. And then depending on the fact the package is already > installed or not, there would be an install/remove button. You may even add Yes, why not having rpmdrake-1 back? :)) > a filter "only show installed packages" and "only show non-installed > packages". I really don't see why this would be difficult for beginners. > Instead of having two rpmdrake icons in the MCC with a + and a - symbol, you > would have only one +/- that would do the job. I really cannot understand > why it would be more complicated for newbies. And IMO, it would be more > confusing to have one "show installed packages" checkbox that would make > them appear as a tree at the end of non-installed packages. > > Eric > > -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Lyvim Xaphir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (utilizing user input). I personally believe this was a decision handed
> down from management ("ergonomics team") and not a developer's decision;
> which I stand ready to be corrected on this from Buchan, GC, or whomever
> else may have better historic info.
Not really. Actually the "ergonomics team" for rpmdrake2 was made
of David Baudens, who is our "ergnomics/UI" head/designer (I
don't know how to say it, please David excuse any lack of
precision), Warly (more or less, as the head-of-distribution),
Francois Pons (as urpmi master, and chief-of-myself), and myself
(as the developer who was going to implement it). We had more or
less convergent ideas when it went to trying to simplify the UI
for beginners.
--
Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
Le mar 24/06/2003 à 11:15, Eric Fernandez a écrit : > Why not doing a "browse packages" interface, independent from any > install/uninstall consideration, with all information we can find in the > install rpmdrake. And then depending on the fact the package is already > installed or not, there would be an install/remove button. You may even add > a filter "only show installed packages" and "only show non-installed > packages". I really don't see why this would be difficult for beginners. > Instead of having two rpmdrake icons in the MCC with a + and a - symbol, you > would have only one +/- that would do the job. I really cannot understand > why it would be more complicated for newbies. And IMO, it would be more > confusing to have one "show installed packages" checkbox that would make > them appear as a tree at the end of non-installed packages. > I agree with u, but GC point me out the fact that it will be a pain to maintain such an app :( So someone decide to do it on his own, or wee will have to cope with this --- Parce que vous etes un grand seigneur, vous vous croyez un grand genie ! -- Beaumarchais, Le Mariage de Figaro
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
>> -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". > >It's a good idea[1] but I still don't see how to integrate well >an options dialog. I don't want to add a menubar nor a toolbar >just for that. I was thinking I was going to show installed >software as well in searches by default, I think it should be ok >for beginners. Yes it is a good idea... and not. If a new checkbox "search for installed softwares" has to be added to an interface which is especially made for installing software, it demonstrates there is a problem with the interface, and reviewers will criticise it. Then why not making appear this button in the uninstall rpmdrake too ? And I expect so many newbies on the mandrakeexpert or mailing lists asking why there is such a button. Why not doing a "browse packages" interface, independent from any install/uninstall consideration, with all information we can find in the install rpmdrake. And then depending on the fact the package is already installed or not, there would be an install/remove button. You may even add a filter "only show installed packages" and "only show non-installed packages". I really don't see why this would be difficult for beginners. Instead of having two rpmdrake icons in the MCC with a + and a - symbol, you would have only one +/- that would do the job. I really cannot understand why it would be more complicated for newbies. And IMO, it would be more confusing to have one "show installed packages" checkbox that would make them appear as a tree at the end of non-installed packages. Eric
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 05:02:49PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > > mandrakeclub (or do a telephone poll for registered users, but that will > > > be more expensive). > > > > I don't like mandrakeclub much. > why? This is ofcourse a bit oftopic. But club gives you an excellent few > of the (paying) user experience of the distro. Mandrake lacks resources > currently. I assume they also lack resources for doing market research of > individual users. Being actively involved in the club, would tell you what > users interest the most (it ofcourse also costs too much time for every > cooker to do it, but it is in contrast to this list, feedback of non-tech > users). > Ok, above only explains 1 possible advantage of club, that ofcourse does > not mean you have to like or dislike it. > If I were an AOL user I'd say "me too", but I'll expand a bit ;-) I'm a silver member of mandrakeclub and I rarely visit the site and find something useful there. Maybe I'm not the targeted user of mandrake club, since I know most things that come up in the forums and the security updates announces come in via e-mail. Voting for RPM's is nice, but hardly something that should be available all the time. The forums have not nearly enough presence of mandrake employees, so it has degenerated in a shouting competition where newbies cry that things aren't working properly (mostly organisational) and "loyal" members saying the same, but more politely. I believe mandrakeusers.org provides more value than club does and for free too. The software that is members-only is so hard to reach that I don't bother anymore, getting it directly from the source is easier. (with the exception of a few real commercial ones, but staroffice is not part of that anymore, so why bother) So I'm a member, mainly because I don't want mandrake to die! Cheers, Simon
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 14:37, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 05:54, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > No, Lyvim. For everyone else on this list, this is a simple practical > > matter of what is the best way for rpmdrake to function. No-one on this > > list, to the best of my knowledge, being an automaton, we all inevitably > > have different ideas on this topic. It's just *you* who seems to want to > > turn it into a Biblical struggle. GIVE IT UP. > > It was never a simple matter because it involved the public at large, it > *is* a free public debate involving history and different ideas about > the best way for rpmdrake to function, and the fact that we all have Everything to do with Mandrake involves the public at large exactly as much as this issue, purely insofar as it's "the public at large" that uses rpmdrake. The idea that Mandrake have some special obligation to consult "the public at large" as to how to design software is your invention. Your usage of the term "free public debate" is the kind of thing I find intensely irritating about your tone throughout this debate; it's speechifying nonsense designed to elevate the debate to lofty abstracts and allow you to go on in your grandiose fashion about things that are rather irrelevant to the actual software. -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Am Samstag, 21. Juni 2003 01:38 schrieb Pierre Jarillon: > Le Samedi 21 Juin 2003 00:39, Steffen Barszus a écrit : > > 1) synaptic > > - > > ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 : > > http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg) > > > > It is for softwaremanagment , includes as far as I can see source > > managment and looks very powerfull to me. > > Yes ! This is a good GUI. > It can be improved ;-) Mandrake if better for this : > - mandrake 9.1 allows to create a liste of medias > - mandrake 9.1 allows to select the medias (CD, contribs, updates...) > yep > Synaptic would be better with a forth tab called "How to launch ?" > - from menu (ever include or not) > - from console > - automatic when needed (ie: plug-in) > - daemon > Often newbies ask "How to launch ?". They ask too "where is the .exe ?" nope. Again, synaptic is not for newbies, current rpmdrake not for advanced user. Mix both and you will get something suboptimal. Steffen
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Am Samstag, 21. Juni 2003 01:49 schrieb w9ya: > That's what I was saying ! > > (Now be prepared for some flames.) > > Bob Never intended to flame. Its just my opinion from "outside" the discussion. Steffen
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Am Samstag, 21. Juni 2003 02:49 schrieb Lyvim Xaphir:
> This is absolutely correct.
>
> > Looking to the "outside world" only to interfaces are somewhat comparable
> > to rpmdrake-1.4-alike.
>
> Correct again. Look at Windows 98SR2 at the software "Add/Remove
> Programs" applet in the control panel and you will see this is true. It
> is a kindergarten version of standard rpmdrake.
Never ever compare Linux with windows for design decission. This control-panel
is crap if you think about it. Every app has its own interface to install but
a central interface to remove. To make it worse, half of them have too an own
interface to remove and a quarter of them you will never get clean away from
your system. Further you don't have the same needs on that OS. As I pointed
out. The only somewhat comparable UIs are Yast2 and synaptic (at least what I
know about).
> The purpose behind beginner rpmdrake seems to have been to out-simplify
> XP rather than seeking a unique application match to the users
> (utilizing user input). I personally believe this was a decision handed
> down from management ("ergonomics team") and not a developer's decision;
> which I stand ready to be corrected on this from Buchan, GC, or whomever
> else may have better historic info.
That haven't to be something bad. In comercial software engineering it is
rather normal that developers don't make design decsissions. What I wanted to
point out is if urpmi is enough for advanced user's only interface. I sort of
dislike your complaining kind of speaking and your assumption to be right.
Steffen
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 18:39, Steffen Barszus wrote:
> Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 21:36 schrieb Buchan Milne:
> >
> > IMHO, the fact that you need 17 screenshots says enough about it's
> > complexity, and although there seem to be some nice features
> > (disk-free-space meter and it seems to be able to show details from
> > different versions of packages side-by-side) and it looks professional
> > in some respects, is IMHO a bit complex. But I guess I should actually
> > try it (but I don't think I will have time ..).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Buchan
>
>
> I'm following the thread since a while and I'm not sure yet what to think
> about it. I'm under the impression that it seems not clear who is the
> targeted person that tool is designed for. If it is for newbies the interface
> how it currently is can be fine, although I would not separate that hard
> between software installation and deinstallation. Software management is one
> task and can not be split. What I dislike is to list installed packages in
> the softwareinstaller. This is in total contrast to the actual design
> decision. It obsoletes the complete idea behind it. I'm against such a half
> made step. Either there is one interface for both and the separation idea is
> not working or they are separated.
> From the discussion I read it seems clear to me that the simplified interface
> does not work for people that have just a bit of knowledge. So having it that
> simplified would require a full featured software management tool for the more
> advanced users. This is what I read out of the wish of having the old
> rpmdrake back and the discussion in this thread.
This is absolutely correct.
>
> Looking to the "outside world" only to interfaces are somewhat comparable to
> rpmdrake-1.4-alike.
Correct again. Look at Windows 98SR2 at the software "Add/Remove
Programs" applet in the control panel and you will see this is true. It
is a kindergarten version of standard rpmdrake.
The purpose behind beginner rpmdrake seems to have been to out-simplify
XP rather than seeking a unique application match to the users
(utilizing user input). I personally believe this was a decision handed
down from management ("ergonomics team") and not a developer's decision;
which I stand ready to be corrected on this from Buchan, GC, or whomever
else may have better historic info.
>
> 1) synaptic
> -
> ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 :
> http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg)
>
> It is for software management , includes as far as I can see source management
> and looks very powerful to me.
>
> 2) yast2-softwareinstaller
> --
>
> I guess the screenshots are saying enough.
>
> What in both is the same: They don't try to hide complexity. The only
> alternative currently for power-user is to use urpmi. And this is what people
> complain about.
>
> I can only say don't make half decisions. The screenshot of synaptic shows
> exactly how a power-user tool could looks like. It looks clean but powerful.
> Adding complexity to a newbie-tool is awkward and breaking own made design
> decisions is bad.
>
> Steffen
--LX
--
Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1
Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk
Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
That's what I was saying ! (Now be prepared for some flames.) Bob On Friday 20 June 2003 05:39 pm, Steffen Barszus wrote: > Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 21:36 schrieb Buchan Milne: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Steffen Barszus wrote: > > > Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 20:26 schrieb Buchan Milne: > > > > > > [... UI review ] > > > > > > > > > > > > SuSE 8.1 as far as I understood. (http://lwn.net/Articles/10061/) > > > > Thanks. > > > > IMHO, the fact that you need 17 screenshots says enough about it's > > complexity, and although there seem to be some nice features > > (disk-free-space meter and it seems to be able to show details from > > different versions of packages side-by-side) and it looks professional > > in some respects, is IMHO a bit complex. But I guess I should actually > > try it (but I don't think I will have time ..). > > > > Regards, > > Buchan > > I'm following the thread since a while and I'm not sure yet what to think > about it. I'm under the impression that it seems not clear who is the > targeted person that tool is designed for. If it is for newbies the > interface how it currently is can be fine, alltough I would not seperat > that hard between software installation and deinstallation. > Softwaremanagment is one task and can not be splitted. What I dislike is to > list installed packages in the softwareinstaller. This is in total contrast > to the actual design decission. It obsoltes the complete idea behind it. > I'm against such a half made step. Either there is one interface for both > and the seperation idea is not working or they are seperated. > From the discussion I read it seems clear to me that the simplified > interface does not work for people that have just a bit of knowledge. So > having it that simplified would require a full featured softwaremanagment > tool for the more advanced users. This is what I read out of the wish of > having the old rpmdrake back and the discussion in this thread. > > Looking to the "outside world" only to interfaces are somewhat comperable > to rpmdrake-1.4-alike. > > 1) synaptic > - > ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 : > http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg) > > It is for softwaremanagment , includes as far as I can see source managment > and looks very powerfull to me. > > 2) yast2-softwareinstaller > -- > > I guess the screenshots are saying enough. > > What in both is the same: They don't try to hide complexity. The only > alternative currently for power-user is to use urpmi. And this is what > people complain about. > > I can only say don't make half decissions. The screenshot of synaptic shows > exactly how a power-user tool could looks like. It looks clean but > powerfull. Adding complexity to a newbie-tool is awkward and breaking own > made design decissions is bad. > > Steffen
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Le Samedi 21 Juin 2003 00:39, Steffen Barszus a écrit : > 1) synaptic > - > ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 : > http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg) > > It is for softwaremanagment , includes as far as I can see source managment > and looks very powerfull to me. Yes ! This is a good GUI. It can be improved ;-) Mandrake if better for this : - mandrake 9.1 allows to create a liste of medias - mandrake 9.1 allows to select the medias (CD, contribs, updates...) Synaptic would be better with a forth tab called "How to launch ?" - from menu (ever include or not) - from console - automatic when needed (ie: plug-in) - daemon Often newbies ask "How to launch ?". They ask too "where is the .exe ?" -- Pierre Jarillon - http://pjarillon.free.fr/ Vice-président de l'ABUL : http://abul.org/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 21:36 schrieb Buchan Milne: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Steffen Barszus wrote: > > Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 20:26 schrieb Buchan Milne: > > > > [... UI review ] > > > > SuSE 8.1 as far as I understood. (http://lwn.net/Articles/10061/) > > Thanks. > > IMHO, the fact that you need 17 screenshots says enough about it's > complexity, and although there seem to be some nice features > (disk-free-space meter and it seems to be able to show details from > different versions of packages side-by-side) and it looks professional > in some respects, is IMHO a bit complex. But I guess I should actually > try it (but I don't think I will have time ..). > > Regards, > Buchan I'm following the thread since a while and I'm not sure yet what to think about it. I'm under the impression that it seems not clear who is the targeted person that tool is designed for. If it is for newbies the interface how it currently is can be fine, alltough I would not seperat that hard between software installation and deinstallation. Softwaremanagment is one task and can not be splitted. What I dislike is to list installed packages in the softwareinstaller. This is in total contrast to the actual design decission. It obsoltes the complete idea behind it. I'm against such a half made step. Either there is one interface for both and the seperation idea is not working or they are seperated. >From the discussion I read it seems clear to me that the simplified interface does not work for people that have just a bit of knowledge. So having it that simplified would require a full featured softwaremanagment tool for the more advanced users. This is what I read out of the wish of having the old rpmdrake back and the discussion in this thread. Looking to the "outside world" only to interfaces are somewhat comperable to rpmdrake-1.4-alike. 1) synaptic - ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 : http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg) It is for softwaremanagment , includes as far as I can see source managment and looks very powerfull to me. 2) yast2-softwareinstaller -- I guess the screenshots are saying enough. What in both is the same: They don't try to hide complexity. The only alternative currently for power-user is to use urpmi. And this is what people complain about. I can only say don't make half decissions. The screenshot of synaptic shows exactly how a power-user tool could looks like. It looks clean but powerfull. Adding complexity to a newbie-tool is awkward and breaking own made design decissions is bad. Steffen
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > BTW, if anything constructive is going to come from this, someone needs > to put this somewhere where it won't be forgotten, either in a wiki of > some description (cooker?) or in bugzilla (BTW, this is one of my issues > with hugs discussions on cooker, they get lost if no-one takes the > effort to document them, which is possibly why bugzilla or the cooker > wiki is a better forum). As for me, I'm ok with current situation: - mandrake developer agrees, she implements the feature/change and says so in the changelog and in the cvs of the app - mandrake developer doesn't agree, the information is somewhat "lost" but not really since mail archives have the thread if another troll is revived later on > Anyway, final comments on rpmdrake as it currently is: > 1a)Could we have a toolbar, instead of the huge banner, from which we > could have access to an options dialog box, and possibly to the sources > manager (sure, rpmdrake would have to reload lists afterwards, tough). > or I don't like "instead of". These have two different functions (the banner is simply a title, contains colours and icon so that beginner is not too frightened, whereas toolbar contains functional information). > 1b)Have a checkbox for "search in installed packages" In my eternal quest for keeping rpmdrake UI-simple, I sort of "don't want" to add a toolbar or another checkbox if they are not "very" important.. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > -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". It's a good idea[1] but I still don't see how to integrate well an options dialog. I don't want to add a menubar nor a toolbar just for that. I was thinking I was going to show installed software as well in searches by default, I think it should be ok for beginners. Ref: [1] I haven't implemented yet the backend to show installed software, because after thinking I'm actually thinking it will be a bit more complicated to do than expected, because the "special" treeview I use is shared (from ugtk2.pm) with the install and with the services configurator, and it's meant to contain consistent selectable entries.. but of course that's only a technical point, it's possible -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steffen Barszus wrote: > Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 20:26 schrieb Buchan Milne: > > [... UI review ] > >>SuSE >>- >>I haven't used SuSE much, and can't find a screenshot now ... > > > Here I can help out. > > http://www.suse.de/~sh/YaST2-Package-Manager/screen-shots.html .This is from > SuSE 8.1 as far as I understood. (http://lwn.net/Articles/10061/) > Thanks. IMHO, the fact that you need 17 screenshots says enough about it's complexity, and although there seem to be some nice features (disk-free-space meter and it seems to be able to show details from different versions of packages side-by-side) and it looks professional in some respects, is IMHO a bit complex. But I guess I should actually try it (but I don't think I will have time ..). Regards, Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+82JSrJK6UGDSBKcRAnTmAJwPcewT7m1QIsKJXSkApSXj/awHZACeLoKe B9/BkOfMsDjKdugKf/e/hNQ= =47FH -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
well, can you place your document on the wiki ? > Synaptic > > http://distro.conectiva.com.br/prjs/synaptic/filter.jpg > (I don't know how recent this is ...) very very old :) > Ok, even for a pretty advanced user, this is serisously complicated, > and overly so (IMHO). The UI toolkit is also at odds with anything > most users will be using most of the time (in terms of widgets, > colours, themes etc). What is it? Motif? Athena? It is Wings, a toolkits used by Windowsmaker. this is not a recent screenshot, they switched to gtk. I think, for a advanced user, it is perfect. I have show this to some debian users ( who did even know that a gui was availiable ) , and we didn't have any problem with it. First time I used it :) On the other hand, for a perfect newbie, it is more complicated, for sure. -- Michaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 20:26 schrieb Buchan Milne: [... UI review ] > SuSE > - > I haven't used SuSE much, and can't find a screenshot now ... Here I can help out. http://www.suse.de/~sh/YaST2-Package-Manager/screen-shots.html .This is from SuSE 8.1 as far as I understood. (http://lwn.net/Articles/10061/) Steffen
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 w9ya wrote: > On Friday 20 June 2003 12:22 pm, Adam Williamson wrote: > Now that is very funny. There aren't any bad Mandrake rpms. and just not > possible to create one eh ? > Not without being spammed to death ;-) (I get more spam from rpm-bots than other spam, I think ... and that doesn't even include mails from users who send directly, bugzilla, or cooker mail). >>I simply don't believe this is possible within the current context of >>how Linux, OS'es in more general terms and computers themselves work. >>*Anyone* sitting down in front of an unfamiliar computer is either going >>to have to receive instruction (through interaction or through >>documentation) or go through a painful process of trial and error. This >>isn't a good situation, but equally it isn't a situation that can be >>resolved by patching rpmdrake. > > > We should respectfully disagree on this. > Well, until someone has objectively tested it and reported their results (with people who have *never* seen a computer before, no, not even DOS) I don't think there is a point arguing it ... Regards, Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+81W/rJK6UGDSBKcRAjB2AJ0avSJ7faDMJ7DrPybtUs+WmTTGfwCffVHP /2IDGswaWM4C2A1ufY8m5Ns= =SpSo -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 w9ya wrote: > On Friday 20 June 2003 03:18 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > >>In summary >>- -the fact that some people here find urpmi more convenient doens't mean >>we think newbies should use it, but it means we don't use rpmdrake much >>- -Windows isn't much better (it doesn't show me alternative media players >>like winamp when I click any "Add/remove programs" menu. Installing >>softare from the network is possible if you have an Active Directory >>domain, but each piece of software (that doesn't support MSI files) >>needs to be specially prepared for this. (BTW, this is why I think urpmi >>should have LDAP support ...). Software you uninstall sometimes doesn't >>get removed from the list of installed software. Software installation >>and uninstallation can be unpredictable. Not all software installs >>itself into the list of installed software (yes, even ones where you run >>a real setup.exe). >>- -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 ? > By "branch", I meant an entry in a tree, with more "branches" (subtrees) or "leaves" below it, so if you have strated rpmdrake in install mode: +Development +Graphical Environment +Server +Workstation +*Installed Packages* Or, possibly, uninstalled packages should only be show on search, in which case: +Development +Graphical Environment +Server +Workstation +Search results +-result1 +-result2 ++Installed software +-installed result1 This neatly gets around at least one of those problems, and shouldn't add too much complexity to the UI (though it might to the backend). Anyway, a UI review would probably want to look at other interfaces. == rpmdrake 1.4 - ftp://mandrake.redbox.cz/Mandrake-old/8.2/i586/tutorial/SoftwareMgr/images/rpmdrake14.gif I think the big problem with the UI in rpmdrake 8.2 (the one in C) was that there was an "installed" tab, and an "installable" tab. Many people missed these, and had to be explained to how they could see which software was installed, and how to remove it. Also, the fact that you could select software for installation and uninstallation simultaneously (possibly unknowingly, and the UI subsequently hiding it from you) was a problem. Also, the details window was too small to use easily, even on a relatively large screen when maximised. Support for verifying files in an rpm easily was a nice feature though :-(. Synaptic - http://distro.conectiva.com.br/prjs/synaptic/filter.jpg (I don't know how recent this is ...) Ok, even for a pretty advanced user, this is serisously complicated, and overly so (IMHO). The UI toolkit is also at odds with anything most users will be using most of the time (in terms of widgets, colours, themes etc). What is it? Motif? Athena? Red Hat - --- http://www.redhat.com/img/linux_ss_per_install1.gif IMHO, way too simplistic, it is trying to be too much like the components of Windows 2000 Server, and is almost as bad at not allowing fine enough choices (though this may be a consequence of the RH packaging, for example requiring the server side of samba installed just to use the winbind authentication bits on a desktop in a windows domain). I don't see any version information, and I don't know if multiple sources can be used or if you can see any details on a package or search easily. SuSE - I haven't used SuSE much, and can't find a screenshot now ... GnoRPM - -- http://www.daa.com.au/~james/software/gnorpm/gnorpm-0.6.gif I endured much pain under GnoRPM on RH6.x and Mandrake 7.x. The only good thing it ever had going for it was displaying the icons stored in the RPM, but I haven't seen many RPMs with those in recent times ... Kpackage - (I void kpackage, since it makes a mess of double-clicking on rpms to get gurpmi going, which is generally a better option): http://www.general.uwa.edu.au/u/toivo/kpackage/snapshot4.png The UI is more comples than rpmdrake 1.4, search capability is hidden behind icons that don't look too intuitive. Checkboxes to select packages to install is also a bit more intuitive than the KDE checkmark. == BTW, if anything constructive is going to come from this, someone needs to put this somewhere where it won't be forgotten, either in a wiki of some description (cooker?) or in bugzilla (BTW, this is one of my issues with hugs discussions on cooker, they get lost if no-one takes the effort to document them, which is possibly why bugzilla or the cooker wiki is a better forum). Anyway, final comments on rpmdrake as it currently is: 1a)Could we
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Friday 20 June 2003 12:56 pm, Levi Ramsey wrote: > On Fri Jun 20 11:22 -0500, w9ya wrote: > > Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a > > better tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority > > right off the bat. Make it gui and play in their world -view. > > The beauty of Open Source and Free Software is that you can scratch your > particular itch easily. Hack up an addition to rpmdrake and contribute > it. The source to current rpmdrake is available; copy from that as much > as you like (obviously this would require that your code be GPL'd). If > you don't know Perl already, well, this will be a learning experience > (Perl looks very good on resumes and so forth, from what I've heard). Thank you. This is among the few intellegent responses I have seen so far. (You have restored my faith.) Bob Finch
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Friday 20 June 2003 12:22 pm, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 16:50, w9ya wrote: > > > > I *AM* saying that a user watching me install could easily think it > > > > was too hard. And I will maintain that having to hit all these damn > > > > buttons, in the right order, to use the rpmdrake tool to find, get, > > > > and then install a program is MUCH harder than finding, getting, and > > > > installing a program in the windows world. I use both, and I have > > > > been using computers for 35 years. You will have to *exactly* explain > > > > to me how in a step by step fashion the current rpmdrake tools are > > > > actually easier. > > > > > > You have to "hit loads of damn buttons in the right order" to get and > > > install software in Windows. You have to open IE, find the website for > > > the program, download the installer to somewhere, know how to find and > > > run it, find it and run it, agree to some ludicrous clickwrap license, > > > then install it somewhere. That's *oodles* of buttons to hit. > > > > Which proves my point. Why be just as lame as Windows can be ? Why not > > improve and make a nice gui app, that handles ALL of what needs to be > > handled. > > No. I'm merely echoing the other person who made the important point > that Windows is terrible in this very area and holding it up as an > example is one thing we should *not* be doing. > > > > Well...for all programs that conform to the Add / Remove Programs > > > thingy, yes there is. Sadly, this is by no means *all* programs. > > > > Well you can have bad rpms too. > > Not Mandrake ones. This is a crucially misunderstood point. People > assume you ought to be able to install any rpm on any rpm-based > distribution, which is quite simply wrong and not at all what the rpm > format is designed for. Now that is very funny. There aren't any bad Mandrake rpms. and just not possible to create one eh ? > > > > > Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a > > > > better tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a > > > > superiority right off the bat. Make it gui and play in their world > > > > -view. > > > > > > I think rpmdrake already is that tool. Why? It's predictable. You only > > > need to teach someone how rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove work *once* and > > > they can install and remove every single piece of software in Mandrake. > > > > They point is *NOT* to have to teach a newbie. But rather to have it be > > intuitive yet more functional than what they are use to. That is the > > goal. Are not we Linux users capable of striving for that ? > > I simply don't believe this is possible within the current context of > how Linux, OS'es in more general terms and computers themselves work. > *Anyone* sitting down in front of an unfamiliar computer is either going > to have to receive instruction (through interaction or through > documentation) or go through a painful process of trial and error. This > isn't a good situation, but equally it isn't a situation that can be > resolved by patching rpmdrake. We should respectfully disagree on this. Bob
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Fri Jun 20 11:22 -0500, w9ya wrote: > Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a better > tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority right off > the bat. Make it gui and play in their world -view. The beauty of Open Source and Free Software is that you can scratch your particular itch easily. Hack up an addition to rpmdrake and contribute it. The source to current rpmdrake is available; copy from that as much as you like (obviously this would require that your code be GPL'd). If you don't know Perl already, well, this will be a learning experience (Perl looks very good on resumes and so forth, from what I've heard). -- Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Currently playing: Rush - Presto - Available Light Linux 2.4.21-0.15mdk 13:52:00 up 10 days, 13:07, 12 users, load average: 0.09, 0.20, 0.21
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 16:50, w9ya wrote: > > > I *AM* saying that a user watching me install could easily think it was > > > too hard. And I will maintain that having to hit all these damn buttons, > > > in the right order, to use the rpmdrake tool to find, get, and then > > > install a program is MUCH harder than finding, getting, and installing a > > > program in the windows world. I use both, and I have been using computers > > > for 35 years. You will have to *exactly* explain to me how in a step by > > > step fashion the current rpmdrake tools are actually easier. > > > > You have to "hit loads of damn buttons in the right order" to get and > > install software in Windows. You have to open IE, find the website for > > the program, download the installer to somewhere, know how to find and > > run it, find it and run it, agree to some ludicrous clickwrap license, > > then install it somewhere. That's *oodles* of buttons to hit. > > Which proves my point. Why be just as lame as Windows can be ? Why not improve > and make a nice gui app, that handles ALL of what needs to be handled. No. I'm merely echoing the other person who made the important point that Windows is terrible in this very area and holding it up as an example is one thing we should *not* be doing. > > Well...for all programs that conform to the Add / Remove Programs > > thingy, yes there is. Sadly, this is by no means *all* programs. > > Well you can have bad rpms too. Not Mandrake ones. This is a crucially misunderstood point. People assume you ought to be able to install any rpm on any rpm-based distribution, which is quite simply wrong and not at all what the rpm format is designed for. > > > > > Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a > > > better tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority > > > right off the bat. Make it gui and play in their world -view. > > > > I think rpmdrake already is that tool. Why? It's predictable. You only > > need to teach someone how rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove work *once* and > > they can install and remove every single piece of software in Mandrake. > > They point is *NOT* to have to teach a newbie. But rather to have it be > intuitive yet more functional than what they are use to. That is the goal. > Are not we Linux users capable of striving for that ? I simply don't believe this is possible within the current context of how Linux, OS'es in more general terms and computers themselves work. *Anyone* sitting down in front of an unfamiliar computer is either going to have to receive instruction (through interaction or through documentation) or go through a painful process of trial and error. This isn't a good situation, but equally it isn't a situation that can be resolved by patching rpmdrake. -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 14:37, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > It was never a simple matter because it involved the public at large, it > *is* a free public debate involving history and different ideas about > the best way for rpmdrake to function, and the fact that we all have > different ideas on this subject means that everyone gets a chance to be > heard. Which btw clears the way for me to state my case, and your > personal vendetta against my personal self in that regard is > irrelevant. This is why I haven't responded to your efforts to silence > my voice before now; your irrelevance. > > The fact of the matter is that no matter what your preconceptions are, I > now know for a fact that you are in the minority on this matter. I > can't be more specific on that. If you've got a problem with me > personally, then you start sending me email private, and I'll be more > than glad to start dealing with you there. I have a preference for > dealing with people face to face, because I find that in my personal > experience it eliminates alot of overt long range pinhead arrogance on > the part of the other person just about immediately. But in lieu of > that, I'll take the next best thing. Does anyone have a pin? My detector of huge balloons of pomposity is registering off the scale. -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Friday 20 June 2003 08:02 am, Greg Meyer wrote: > Forward to Cooker. I did it again. > > On Friday 20 June 2003 12:38 am, w9ya wrote: > > Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" > > have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY > > operating system from a user's standpoint. So > > > > I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at > > all. But the rpm-drake stuff tries to BOTH install AND manage packages > > without a clear understanding that a user *would* think it is too hard to > > install linux programs when the gui tools are not made clean and easy for > > him to use. > > This is your opinion, not a fact, but your opinion that I and others > disagree with. It may be supported by some anecdotal evidence, but that > does not change the fact that it is an opinion. No one, including you and > LX have done any market research that has any kind of validity to it that > says a result, one way or another. LX's beef, from what I gather, isn't so > much abour rpmdrake as it is about Mandrake Developers not listening to the > votes of Club members. The parameters that I gathered my evidence under are this: user feedback to me.. To a large extent this is their opinions. Alot of users found the older rpmdrake easier to use. They had specific issues with a number of things in the new rpmdrake. I shared this with this the cooker community at large. I hope you are not discounting their opinions in any way. That could be counter-productive. > > Since I am in no position to influence the developer's, and not able to > assist in the developement of any changes, I need to spend my time on other > more valuable (to me) issues, so I am officially dropping out of this > conversation. Um, well o.k. For me, it might be a long time before I share any other user feedback. This has been a disagreeable endeavor for me. Perhaps it is the way I was made to feel defensive about the info I shared ? Bob Finch
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > >> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my > >> > >> best freind now > >> > >> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol. > >> > >> Did Greg even vaguely suggest anyone else should use urpmi? Please, if > >> you don't visit the list often (as you state), at least *read* the > >> posts? > > > > Not nice. > > In hindsight, no ... > > > Now go do like your mother might suggest; and wash your mouth > > out with soap. > > I have better things to do ... > > > Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up > > in a discussion about newbies ? > > To indicate that he is not an authority on the uses and abuses of > rpmdrake, since, like many cookers, he uses urpmi more than rpmdrake ... > > > Sorry if this sounds harse, but it was you that suggested that I > > "..should at least *read* the posts" > > Did I miss something? > > >> >>I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say > >> > >> that at one point, installing Windows software is now easy because > >> people are > >> > >> >> used to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know > >> > >> how to do it there either, but they had to learn. > >> > >> > Well for the last 5 years or more, installing in Windows is point > >> > >> and > >> > >> click on > >> > >> > a single icon for downloaded programs. > >> > >> You mean on Windows I actually have to download files? How? Where? > >> What if I don't like this one, where do I find another one? And if I > >> can install it like that, can I uninstall it like that? And why, if I > >> can uninstall everything in one place, can't I install everything from > >> the same place? > >> > >> And what about files called .msi files? > >> > >> Anyway, on Mandrake, you can just double click on any rpm you > >> downloaded, and it will install it, and anything it needs. > >> > >> Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some > >> problem > > > > Um, again we were discussing a newbie using the rpmdrake tools to > > download, and additionally to use them as a basis to discover what > > software might be installed. In that context, I will just have to > > disagree with your assessment of the problem, as this concerns rpmdrake > > and not a download sitting on a desktop or otherwise easily seen by a > > user , logged in as such user. > > So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be > able to see what software is installed, but > > -kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will currently build or work > with rpm-4.2) The *point* was, that new users should/might want to have one gui based utility do this. Or at least that was my point. One program for the user to run, not several. > > -The majority of software a user is going to use, they should be able to > find quite quickly Some yes, some no. That was the basis we were talking about. > > -You did claim windows was point-and-click-easy, so why does my girlfriend > install software easily under Mandrake, but not under Windows? There is no > global catalog of available software on Windows in any case. One example. Again the *point* was to consider making it one program. One that can both scan for installed and not installed programs. On this I thought we agreed several posts ago. Has that changed ? > > The real competition here IMHO is (from what I hear) Lindows (who has it > easy AFAIK since they run as root so there never are any problems > regarding rights etc) and possibly SuSE. Redhat also has a simple > interface, that does also show you what is installed, but there it is > definitely not fine-grained enough. Well now I am confused, or do you like to "argue" both sides of the "coin" ? Bob > > Regards, > Buchan
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Friday 20 June 2003 03:18 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > w9ya wrote: > > On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote: > >>So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be > >>able to see what software is installed, but > >> > >>-kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will currently build or > >> work with rpm-4.2) > > > > The *point* was, that new users should/might want to have one gui based > > utility do this. Or at least that was my point. One program for the > > user to > > > run, not several. > > (Hint, I am not disagreeing with you on this point, read the paragraph > above the one you are replying to). > > >>-The majority of software a user is going to use, they should be able to > >>find quite quickly > > > > Some yes, some no. That was the basis we were talking about. > > Maybe the real problem is people assuming that Mandrake is as bad as > otehr distros that don't install a CD-writing app when a CD-writer is > found. > > >>-You did claim windows was point-and-click-easy, so why does my > >> girlfriend install software easily under Mandrake, but not under > >> Windows? There is no global catalog of available software on Windows in > >> any case. > > > > One example. Again the *point* was to consider making it one program. > > Not in the context of this paragraph, which was in response to your > claims that software installation is trivial under Windows. > > I lost about 50MB of important data since my previous backup, to a > setup.exe which on uninstall took all the files in the same folder with > it, and the person who installed it had kindly installed it on the root > of my D: drive, which contained all my data. > > > One that > > can both scan for installed and not installed programs. On this I > > thought we > > > agreed several posts ago. Has that changed ? > > No. > > > Well now I am confused, or do you like to "argue" both sides of the > > "coin" ? > > You made some statements which I disagreed with, but you don't seem to > notice that I don't disagree with your main point. > > In summary > - -the fact that some people here find urpmi more convenient doens't mean > we think newbies should use it, but it means we don't use rpmdrake much > - -Windows isn't much better (it doesn't show me alternative media players > like winamp when I click any "Add/remove programs" menu. Installing > softare from the network is possible if you have an Active Directory > domain, but each piece of software (that doesn't support MSI files) > needs to be specially prepared for this. (BTW, this is why I think urpmi > should have LDAP support ...). Software you uninstall sometimes doesn't > get removed from the list of installed software. Software installation > and uninstallation can be unpredictable. Not all software installs > itself into the list of installed software (yes, even ones where you run > a real setup.exe). > - -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 ? Bob P.S. I am choosing to not respond to your previous comments, as this has gone on way beyond a circular argument. > > Regards, > Buchan > > - -- > > |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| > > Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager > Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 > Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za > GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc > 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQE+8sM7rJK6UGDSBKcRAu0kAKCf5J2MiCB3b5qjLVLtb8AwAwmwHwCfdhrR > m7r6KxRG+2RXDFxSLLC+20I= > =BsQV > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > ** > Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our > e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. > **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Friday 20 June 2003 03:18 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > w9ya wrote: > > On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote: > >>So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be > >>able to see what software is installed, but > >> > >>-kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will currently build or > >> work with rpm-4.2) > > > > The *point* was, that new users should/might want to have one gui based > > utility do this. Or at least that was my point. One program for the > > user to > > > run, not several. > > (Hint, I am not disagreeing with you on this point, read the paragraph > above the one you are replying to). > > >>-The majority of software a user is going to use, they should be able to > >>find quite quickly > > > > Some yes, some no. That was the basis we were talking about. > > Maybe the real problem is people assuming that Mandrake is as bad as > otehr distros that don't install a CD-writing app when a CD-writer is > found. > > >>-You did claim windows was point-and-click-easy, so why does my > >> girlfriend install software easily under Mandrake, but not under > >> Windows? There is no global catalog of available software on Windows in > >> any case. > > > > One example. Again the *point* was to consider making it one program. > > Not in the context of this paragraph, which was in response to your > claims that software installation is trivial under Windows. > > I lost about 50MB of important data since my previous backup, to a > setup.exe which on uninstall took all the files in the same folder with > it, and the person who installed it had kindly installed it on the root > of my D: drive, which contained all my data. > > > One that > > can both scan for installed and not installed programs. On this I > > thought we > > > agreed several posts ago. Has that changed ? > > No. > > > Well now I am confused, or do you like to "argue" both sides of the > > "coin" ? > > You made some statements which I disagreed with, but you don't seem to > notice that I don't disagree with your main point. > > In summary > - -the fact that some people here find urpmi more convenient doens't mean > we think newbies should use it, but it means we don't use rpmdrake much > - -Windows isn't much better (it doesn't show me alternative media players > like winamp when I click any "Add/remove programs" menu. Installing > softare from the network is possible if you have an Active Directory > domain, but each piece of software (that doesn't support MSI files) > needs to be specially prepared for this. (BTW, this is why I think urpmi > should have LDAP support ...). Software you uninstall sometimes doesn't > get removed from the list of installed software. Software installation > and uninstallation can be unpredictable. Not all software installs > itself into the list of installed software (yes, even ones where you run > a real setup.exe). > - -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 ? Bob P.S. I am choosing to not respond to your previous comments, as this has gone on way beyond a circular argument. > > Regards, > Buchan > > - -- > > |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| > > Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager > Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 > Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za > GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc > 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQE+8sM7rJK6UGDSBKcRAu0kAKCf5J2MiCB3b5qjLVLtb8AwAwmwHwCfdhrR > m7r6KxRG+2RXDFxSLLC+20I= > =BsQV > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > ** > Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our > e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. > **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY operating system from a user's standpoint. So I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at all. But the rpm-drake stuff tries to BOTH install AND manage packages without a clear understanding that a user *would* think it is too hard to install linux programs when the gui tools are not made clean and easy for him to use. I *AM* saying that a user watching me install could easily think it was too hard. And I will maintain that having to hit all these damn buttons, in the right order, to use the rpmdrake tool to find, get, and then install a program is MUCH harder than finding, getting, and installing a program in the windows world. I use both, and I have been using computers for 35 years. You will have to *exactly* explain to me how in a step by step fashion the current rpmdrake tools are actually easier. Further, I *CAN* go to a gui in Windows and *CAN* find out what is installed. You say differently, but there is a specific place to go. Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a better tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority right off the bat. Make it gui and play in their world -view. Bob On Thursday 19 June 2003 10:35 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > Forwarding to cooker since I sent it to w9ya personally in error. This > happened because I was forgetful and did not workaround his reply-to > settings as he requested. > > On Thursday 19 June 2003 05:29 pm, w9ya wrote: > > Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up in a > > discussion about newbies ? (What is his point?, and how is it germane ?) > > I wasn't really trying to imply anything other than the fact that I am > really not qualified to discuss whether the existing interface is any good > because I never use it. I do think that Mandrake should do a better job > informing people about urpmi, but that is another issue, and is also > largely up to us to do something about. > > I just find it interesting how such a simple thing is so divisive, and also > how easy people think Windows is. You don't install and remove packages in > the same place in Windows, there is no way to query the system to see what > is installed, yet many long time Windows users insist that package > management in Windows is easier. I continue to maintain, and you can > disagree with me, that Windows software just seems easier because it is > familiar.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Friday 20 June 2003 08:02 am, Greg Meyer wrote: > Forward to Cooker. I did it again. > > On Friday 20 June 2003 12:38 am, w9ya wrote: > > Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" > > have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY > > operating system from a user's standpoint. So > > > > I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at > > all. But the rpm-drake stuff tries to BOTH install AND manage packages > > without a clear understanding that a user *would* think it is too hard to > > install linux programs when the gui tools are not made clean and easy for > > him to use. > > This is your opinion, not a fact, but your opinion that I and others > disagree with. It may be supported by some anecdotal evidence, but that > does not change the fact that it is an opinion. No one, including you and > LX have done any market research that has any kind of validity to it that > says a result, one way or another. LX's beef, from what I gather, isn't so > much abour rpmdrake as it is about Mandrake Developers not listening to the > votes of Club members. The parameters that I gathered my evidence under are this: user feedback to me.. To a large extent this is their opinions. Alot of users found the older rpmdrake easier to use. They had specific issues with a number of things in the new rpmdrake. I shared this with this the cooker community at large. I hope you are not discounting their opinions in any way. That could be counter-productive. > > Since I am in no position to influence the developer's, and not able to > assist in the developement of any changes, I need to spend my time on other > more valuable (to me) issues, so I am officially dropping out of this > conversation. Um, well o.k. For me, it might be a long time before I share any other user feedback. This has been a disagreeable endeavor for me. Perhaps it is the way I was made to feel defensive about the info I shared ? Bob Finch
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > >> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my > >> > >> best freind now > >> > >> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol. > >> > >> Did Greg even vaguely suggest anyone else should use urpmi? Please, if > >> you don't visit the list often (as you state), at least *read* the > >> posts? > > > > Not nice. > > In hindsight, no ... > > > Now go do like your mother might suggest; and wash your mouth > > out with soap. > > I have better things to do ... > > > Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up > > in a discussion about newbies ? > > To indicate that he is not an authority on the uses and abuses of > rpmdrake, since, like many cookers, he uses urpmi more than rpmdrake ... > > > Sorry if this sounds harse, but it was you that suggested that I > > "..should at least *read* the posts" > > Did I miss something? > > >> >>I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say > >> > >> that at one point, installing Windows software is now easy because > >> people are > >> > >> >> used to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know > >> > >> how to do it there either, but they had to learn. > >> > >> > Well for the last 5 years or more, installing in Windows is point > >> > >> and > >> > >> click on > >> > >> > a single icon for downloaded programs. > >> > >> You mean on Windows I actually have to download files? How? Where? > >> What if I don't like this one, where do I find another one? And if I > >> can install it like that, can I uninstall it like that? And why, if I > >> can uninstall everything in one place, can't I install everything from > >> the same place? > >> > >> And what about files called .msi files? > >> > >> Anyway, on Mandrake, you can just double click on any rpm you > >> downloaded, and it will install it, and anything it needs. > >> > >> Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some > >> problem > > > > Um, again we were discussing a newbie using the rpmdrake tools to > > download, and additionally to use them as a basis to discover what > > software might be installed. In that context, I will just have to > > disagree with your assessment of the problem, as this concerns rpmdrake > > and not a download sitting on a desktop or otherwise easily seen by a > > user , logged in as such user. > > So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be > able to see what software is installed, but > > -kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will currently build or work > with rpm-4.2) The *point* was, that new users should/might want to have one gui based utility do this. Or at least that was my point. One program for the user to run, not several. > > -The majority of software a user is going to use, they should be able to > find quite quickly Some yes, some no. That was the basis we were talking about. > > -You did claim windows was point-and-click-easy, so why does my girlfriend > install software easily under Mandrake, but not under Windows? There is no > global catalog of available software on Windows in any case. One example. Again the *point* was to consider making it one program. One that can both scan for installed and not installed programs. On this I thought we agreed several posts ago. Has that changed ? > > The real competition here IMHO is (from what I hear) Lindows (who has it > easy AFAIK since they run as root so there never are any problems > regarding rights etc) and possibly SuSE. Redhat also has a simple > interface, that does also show you what is installed, but there it is > definitely not fine-grained enough. Well now I am confused, or do you like to "argue" both sides of the "coin" ? Bob > > Regards, > Buchan
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 05:54, Adam Williamson wrote: > No, Lyvim. For everyone else on this list, this is a simple practical > matter of what is the best way for rpmdrake to function. No-one on this > list, to the best of my knowledge, being an automaton, we all inevitably > have different ideas on this topic. It's just *you* who seems to want to > turn it into a Biblical struggle. GIVE IT UP. It was never a simple matter because it involved the public at large, it *is* a free public debate involving history and different ideas about the best way for rpmdrake to function, and the fact that we all have different ideas on this subject means that everyone gets a chance to be heard. Which btw clears the way for me to state my case, and your personal vendetta against my personal self in that regard is irrelevant. This is why I haven't responded to your efforts to silence my voice before now; your irrelevance. The fact of the matter is that no matter what your preconceptions are, I now know for a fact that you are in the minority on this matter. I can't be more specific on that. If you've got a problem with me personally, then you start sending me email private, and I'll be more than glad to start dealing with you there. I have a preference for dealing with people face to face, because I find that in my personal experience it eliminates alot of overt long range pinhead arrogance on the part of the other person just about immediately. But in lieu of that, I'll take the next best thing. --LX -- Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1 Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 w9ya wrote: > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 10:50 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > >>I think it is interesting that some think it is easier as two, while others >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my best >>freind now > > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol. > Did Greg even vaguely suggest anyone else should use urpmi? Please, if you don't visit the list often (as you state), at least *read* the posts? > >>>2 - Installing ahs nothing to do with "how do I start a program" etc. >>>i.e. >> >>Sure it does. Once it's installed, how do I start it. >> >> >>>Or put another way; if a user can use some other op system's installer >>>without having to think about it, and a linux system can be even better >>>by being more infomative but just as easy to use, then it is a win-win >>>situation. >> >>I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say that at >>one point, installing Windows software is now easy because people are used >>to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know how to do it >>there either, but they had to learn. > > > Well for the last 5 years or more, installing in Windows is point and click on > a single icon for downloaded programs. You mean on Windows I actually have to download files? How? Where? What if I don't like this one, where do I find another one? And if I can install it like that, can I uninstall it like that? And why, if I can uninstall everything in one place, can't I install everything from the same place? And what about files called .msi files? Anyway, on Mandrake, you can just double click on any rpm you downloaded, and it will install it, and anything it needs. Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some problem > It doesn't get any easier than that, > unless you get really creative. i.e. One program to get and install software. Windows (until the Windows installer) had one program for each one you wanted to install. With msi, it's slightly better, but not much. > Now make that same program tell me about what I already have and you have a > winner. Yes, this I agree with, but please don't punt Windows as being the utopia of software installation, it can't even tell me which program installed the mess of dll's all over my system. If it was, we wouldn't need so many MCSEs. Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+8DBurJK6UGDSBKcRArA9AJ9ioTKa0rblXmtUdPJkK1i0XogQoQCfZaG1 mKBbSXeGQVAqoe/Tf0d26Jc= =ZCFj -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Forward to Cooker. I did it again. On Friday 20 June 2003 12:38 am, w9ya wrote: > Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" > have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY > operating system from a user's standpoint. So > > I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at > all. But the rpm-drake stuff tries to BOTH install AND manage packages > without a clear understanding that a user *would* think it is too hard to > install linux programs when the gui tools are not made clean and easy for > him to use. > This is your opinion, not a fact, but your opinion that I and others disagree with. It may be supported by some anecdotal evidence, but that does not change the fact that it is an opinion. No one, including you and LX have done any market research that has any kind of validity to it that says a result, one way or another. LX's beef, from what I gather, isn't so much abour rpmdrake as it is about Mandrake Developers not listening to the votes of Club members. Since I am in no position to influence the developer's, and not able to assist in the developement of any changes, I need to spend my time on other more valuable (to me) issues, so I am officially dropping out of this conversation. -- Greg
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 18:04, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > It is pretty well perceived by the general population, from what I see, > that rpmdrake was redesigned for beginners. The fact that the decision > had a rationale or the fact that the decision was acted on are not facts > that are in dispute. The dispute comes in with the total disconnect > that existed between the users (paying or nonpaying) and a decision that > directly involved them all. A user interface is by it's very nature a > public interface, a means by which the public at large has a window into > the operating system. Therefore by that definition it should be the > public at large that has the *most relevant* input and decision making > powers concerning the user interfaces. Mandrakesoft, to it's credit, > has put a smorgasbord of methods by which users can voice their > preferences. No, Lyvim. For everyone else on this list, this is a simple practical matter of what is the best way for rpmdrake to function. No-one on this list, to the best of my knowledge, being an automaton, we all inevitably have different ideas on this topic. It's just *you* who seems to want to turn it into a Biblical struggle. GIVE IT UP. -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 w9ya wrote: > On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote: > >>So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be >>able to see what software is installed, but >> >>-kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will currently build or work >>with rpm-4.2) > > > The *point* was, that new users should/might want to have one gui based > utility do this. Or at least that was my point. One program for the user to > run, not several. > (Hint, I am not disagreeing with you on this point, read the paragraph above the one you are replying to). > >>-The majority of software a user is going to use, they should be able to >>find quite quickly > > > Some yes, some no. That was the basis we were talking about. > Maybe the real problem is people assuming that Mandrake is as bad as otehr distros that don't install a CD-writing app when a CD-writer is found. > >>-You did claim windows was point-and-click-easy, so why does my girlfriend >>install software easily under Mandrake, but not under Windows? There is no >>global catalog of available software on Windows in any case. > > > One example. Again the *point* was to consider making it one program. Not in the context of this paragraph, which was in response to your claims that software installation is trivial under Windows. I lost about 50MB of important data since my previous backup, to a setup.exe which on uninstall took all the files in the same folder with it, and the person who installed it had kindly installed it on the root of my D: drive, which contained all my data. > One that > can both scan for installed and not installed programs. On this I thought we > agreed several posts ago. Has that changed ? > No. > Well now I am confused, or do you like to "argue" both sides of the "coin" ? You made some statements which I disagreed with, but you don't seem to notice that I don't disagree with your main point. In summary - -the fact that some people here find urpmi more convenient doens't mean we think newbies should use it, but it means we don't use rpmdrake much - -Windows isn't much better (it doesn't show me alternative media players like winamp when I click any "Add/remove programs" menu. Installing softare from the network is possible if you have an Active Directory domain, but each piece of software (that doesn't support MSI files) needs to be specially prepared for this. (BTW, this is why I think urpmi should have LDAP support ...). Software you uninstall sometimes doesn't get removed from the list of installed software. Software installation and uninstallation can be unpredictable. Not all software installs itself into the list of installed software (yes, even ones where you run a real setup.exe). - -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? Regards, Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+8sM7rJK6UGDSBKcRAu0kAKCf5J2MiCB3b5qjLVLtb8AwAwmwHwCfdhrR m7r6KxRG+2RXDFxSLLC+20I= =BsQV -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: double-clicking on files directly from CD's [was: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software]
> > IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of > > failing > > not sure of that, if i have an option that has a meaning, and it > changes name (for whatever reason) I'd like to be notified early, not > having to hunt problem for an option that was ignored. the kernel should ignore, but, signal the failure to the mount program. then, with a option, mount would either fail or ignore it too. and print a warning. this is the way it work, usually. -- Mickaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 00:38, w9ya wrote: > Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" have > little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY operating > system from a user's standpoint. So > > I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at all. > But the rpm-drake stuff tries to BOTH install AND manage packages without a > clear understanding that a user *would* think it is too hard to install linux > programs when the gui tools are not made clean and easy for him to use. > > I *AM* saying that a user watching me install could easily think it was too > hard. And I will maintain that having to hit all these damn buttons, in the > right order, to use the rpmdrake tool to find, get, and then install a > program is MUCH harder than finding, getting, and installing a program in the > windows world. I use both, and I have been using computers for 35 years. You > will have to *exactly* explain to me how in a step by step fashion the > current rpmdrake tools are actually easier. > > Further, I *CAN* go to a gui in Windows and *CAN* find out what is installed. > You say differently, but there is a specific place to go. You are correct. In 98 it's Control Panel - Add/Remove Programs. Within that box you have three tabs. Install/Uninstall (applies to applications that are not included with the 98 installation files, Windows Setup (applies to programs that are included with the 98 OS) and Startup Disk (which has absolutely nothing to do with Add/Remove Programs). In both Install/Uninstall and Windows Setup tabs, you can see what is installed and what is not installed. Additionally you can affect what is installed and uninstalled. So technically, IMO, this applet is presently superior to "beginner rpmdrake", aka rpmdrake 2.X. This Windows 98 control panel applet is extremely similar to what "standard rpmdrake" (aka rpmdrake 1.4) offered, except that standard rpmdrake was much more feature rich and very much superior to what the 98 Add/Remove Programs offered. (from the standpoint of functionality/cosmetics.) In fact it made a statement about the originality of the Mandrake distro and uniquely and distinctly divided it from the crowd. In much the same way that rpm divided Red Hat from the crowd and apt-get divided debian from the crowd. It had that "magic", that probably helped add the noted difference that Mandrake was winning the desktop popularity contest. > > Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a better > tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority right off > the bat. Make it gui and play in their world -view. > > Bob WellI agree. Maintenance problems dictated that the interface be rewritten, however I believe that the cosmetics from rpmdrake 1.4 UI should have been retained, since it had the superiority and originality you refer to. --LX -- Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1 Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 06:44, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > "MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that > > enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears. > > > > I have tried other distros and Mandrake is the best, so I'm willing to give > > my time, talent, and opinion on the matter. The solution is never "go find > > another distribution". > > > > The idea of showing what is already installed or can be installed/upgraded > > would be very nice, ala SuSE Yast. > > Again, I want to state that I do agree that for advanced users, I > do understand "old" rpmdrake is better. > > And, please remember, "first" rpmdrake, written in Perl by pixel, > was much more simple than "old" rpmdrake. > > I think "old" rpmdrake was like that, because it was designed > with advanced users in mind, and it followed (nice) solutions > from advanced/cooker/etc users. > > "New" rpmdrake was designed following our belief (motivated by > several user experiences and us trying to think hard what > beginners would experience) that "old" rpmdrake was "frightening" > and beginners had a hard time understanding the GUI at first > sight. We decided that each tool needs to stay simple, do one > thing and do it well, to be suitable for beginners. We also > decided that DrakX approach was better (show dependencies when > selecting package, not after "install" button is clicked). > > I think current rpmdrake is good for beginners, old one was too > complicated for beginners. I understand this is frustrating for > many advanced users, though a part of the rationale is also that > most advanced users will tend to prefer urpmi. I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate on these points, these last three paragraphs have done much to confirm what I already had gleaned from other indirect sources, which is important, since this verifies from the source. Or I should say, an authoritative source. I also appreciate the time you have taken in this thread to speak to these problems. I understand that every moment that you spend writing to the list are moments that you are either not developing or devoting to personal time. I have been one of those that has preached on your behalf in the past (i.e., on behalf of all employed developers), believe it or not. It is pretty well perceived by the general population, from what I see, that rpmdrake was redesigned for beginners. The fact that the decision had a rationale or the fact that the decision was acted on are not facts that are in dispute. The dispute comes in with the total disconnect that existed between the users (paying or nonpaying) and a decision that directly involved them all. A user interface is by it's very nature a public interface, a means by which the public at large has a window into the operating system. Therefore by that definition it should be the public at large that has the *most relevant* input and decision making powers concerning the user interfaces. Mandrakesoft, to it's credit, has put a smorgasbord of methods by which users can voice their preferences. Mandrakesoft, to it's discredit, has failed in this case to exploit those resources which it itself has put into place, which are as follows: Expert mailing listnewbie mailing listMandrakeclub opinion surveysand the Mandrakeclub rpm voting polls. I purposely exclude the cooker mailing list because it is the sole *public* resource that was used by Mandrakesoft in this case. The greater discredit in this is that the cooker mailing list was the one resource that beginners or new users were most likely *not* to be using as a feedback tool. Which may or may not have been part of the flawed strategy utilized in order to replace the "beginner" rpmdrake UI with the "old" standard rpmdrake. Since you took your personal time to reiterate your history from your cooker standpoint I felt it only fair and necessary that I reiterate the history from the standpoint of everyone else who is not directly involved day to day in cooker. So I will take some time out of my day to do this. 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 beginner
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY operating system from a user's standpoint. So I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at all. But the rpm-drake stuff tries to BOTH install AND manage packages without a clear understanding that a user *would* think it is too hard to install linux programs when the gui tools are not made clean and easy for him to use. I *AM* saying that a user watching me install could easily think it was too hard. And I will maintain that having to hit all these damn buttons, in the right order, to use the rpmdrake tool to find, get, and then install a program is MUCH harder than finding, getting, and installing a program in the windows world. I use both, and I have been using computers for 35 years. You will have to *exactly* explain to me how in a step by step fashion the current rpmdrake tools are actually easier. Further, I *CAN* go to a gui in Windows and *CAN* find out what is installed. You say differently, but there is a specific place to go. Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a better tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority right off the bat. Make it gui and play in their world -view. Bob On Thursday 19 June 2003 10:35 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > Forwarding to cooker since I sent it to w9ya personally in error. This > happened because I was forgetful and did not workaround his reply-to > settings as he requested. > > On Thursday 19 June 2003 05:29 pm, w9ya wrote: > > Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up in a > > discussion about newbies ? (What is his point?, and how is it germane ?) > > I wasn't really trying to imply anything other than the fact that I am > really not qualified to discuss whether the existing interface is any good > because I never use it. I do think that Mandrake should do a better job > informing people about urpmi, but that is another issue, and is also > largely up to us to do something about. > > I just find it interesting how such a simple thing is so divisive, and also > how easy people think Windows is. You don't install and remove packages in > the same place in Windows, there is no way to query the system to see what > is installed, yet many long time Windows users insist that package > management in Windows is easier. I continue to maintain, and you can > disagree with me, that Windows software just seems easier because it is > familiar.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Forwarding to cooker since I sent it to w9ya personally in error. This happened because I was forgetful and did not workaround his reply-to settings as he requested. On Thursday 19 June 2003 05:29 pm, w9ya wrote: > Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up in a > discussion about newbies ? (What is his point?, and how is it germane ?) I wasn't really trying to imply anything other than the fact that I am really not qualified to discuss whether the existing interface is any good because I never use it. I do think that Mandrake should do a better job informing people about urpmi, but that is another issue, and is also largely up to us to do something about. I just find it interesting how such a simple thing is so divisive, and also how easy people think Windows is. You don't install and remove packages in the same place in Windows, there is no way to query the system to see what is installed, yet many long time Windows users insist that package management in Windows is easier. I continue to maintain, and you can disagree with me, that Windows software just seems easier because it is familiar. -- Greg
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 06:44, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > "MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that > > enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears. > > > > I have tried other distros and Mandrake is the best, so I'm willing to give > > my time, talent, and opinion on the matter. The solution is never "go find > > another distribution". > > > > The idea of showing what is already installed or can be installed/upgraded > > would be very nice, ala SuSE Yast. > > Again, I want to state that I do agree that for advanced users, I > do understand "old" rpmdrake is better. > > And, please remember, "first" rpmdrake, written in Perl by pixel, > was much more simple than "old" rpmdrake. > > I think "old" rpmdrake was like that, because it was designed > with advanced users in mind, and it followed (nice) solutions > from advanced/cooker/etc users. > > "New" rpmdrake was designed following our belief (motivated by > several user experiences and us trying to think hard what > beginners would experience) that "old" rpmdrake was "frightening" > and beginners had a hard time understanding the GUI at first > sight. We decided that each tool needs to stay simple, do one > thing and do it well, to be suitable for beginners. We also > decided that DrakX approach was better (show dependencies when > selecting package, not after "install" button is clicked). > > I think current rpmdrake is good for beginners, old one was too > complicated for beginners. I understand this is frustrating for > many advanced users, though a part of the rationale is also that > most advanced users will tend to prefer urpmi. I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate on these points, these last three paragraphs have done much to confirm what I already had gleaned from other indirect sources, which is important, since this verifies from the source. Or I should say, an authoritative source. I also appreciate the time you have taken in this thread to speak to these problems. I understand that every moment that you spend writing to the list are moments that you are either not developing or devoting to personal time. I have been one of those that has preached on your behalf in the past (i.e., on behalf of all employed developers), believe it or not. It is pretty well perceived by the general population, from what I see, that rpmdrake was redesigned for beginners. The fact that the decision had a rationale or the fact that the decision was acted on are not facts that are in dispute. The dispute comes in with the total disconnect that existed between the users (paying or nonpaying) and a decision that directly involved them all. A user interface is by it's very nature a public interface, a means by which the public at large has a window into the operating system. Therefore by that definition it should be the public at large that has the *most relevant* input and decision making powers concerning the user interfaces. Mandrakesoft, to it's credit, has put a smorgasbord of methods by which users can voice their preferences. Mandrakesoft, to it's discredit, has failed in this case to exploit those resources which it itself has put into place, which are as follows: Expert mailing listnewbie mailing listMandrakeclub opinion surveysand the Mandrakeclub rpm voting polls. I purposely exclude the cooker mailing list because it is the sole *public* resource that was used by Mandrakesoft in this case. The greater discredit in this is that the cooker mailing list was the one resource that beginners or new users were most likely *not* to be using as a feedback tool. Which may or may not have been part of the flawed strategy utilized in order to replace the "beginner" rpmdrake UI with the "old" standard rpmdrake. Since you took your personal time to reiterate your history from your cooker standpoint I felt it only fair and necessary that I reiterate the history from the standpoint of everyone else who is not directly involved day to day in cooker. So I will take some time out of my day to do this. 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 beginner
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Thursday 19 June 2003 01:02 pm, andre wrote: > > It may not be the best example. But the number of people who can't find k3d > in rpmdrake because it already installed is definitely non-zero I know people that didn't know it was installed, so they downloaded it and built it from source. In fact, places like alt.os.linx.mandrake are full of people trying to build software from source or get it from rpmfind when it is available on their CD's or in contrib. I don't think some people realize the number of programs that are packaged for Mandrake. -- Greg
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > >> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my > >> > >> best freind now > >> > >> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol. > >> > >> Did Greg even vaguely suggest anyone else should use urpmi? Please, if > >> you don't visit the list often (as you state), at least *read* the > >> posts? > > > > Not nice. > > In hindsight, no ... > > > Now go do like your mother might suggest; and wash your mouth > > out with soap. > > I have better things to do ... > > > Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up > > in a discussion about newbies ? > > To indicate that he is not an authority on the uses and abuses of > rpmdrake, since, like many cookers, he uses urpmi more than rpmdrake ... > > > Sorry if this sounds harse, but it was you that suggested that I > > "..should at least *read* the posts" > > Did I miss something? > > >> >>I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say > >> > >> that at one point, installing Windows software is now easy because > >> people are > >> > >> >> used to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know > >> > >> how to do it there either, but they had to learn. > >> > >> > Well for the last 5 years or more, installing in Windows is point > >> > >> and > >> > >> click on > >> > >> > a single icon for downloaded programs. > >> > >> You mean on Windows I actually have to download files? How? Where? > >> What if I don't like this one, where do I find another one? And if I > >> can install it like that, can I uninstall it like that? And why, if I > >> can uninstall everything in one place, can't I install everything from > >> the same place? > >> > >> And what about files called .msi files? > >> > >> Anyway, on Mandrake, you can just double click on any rpm you > >> downloaded, and it will install it, and anything it needs. > >> > >> Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some > >> problem > > > > Um, again we were discussing a newbie using the rpmdrake tools to > > download, and additionally to use them as a basis to discover what > > software might be installed. In that context, I will just have to > > disagree with your assessment of the problem, as this concerns rpmdrake > > and not a download sitting on a desktop or otherwise easily seen by a > > user , logged in as such user. > > So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be > able to see what software is installed, but > > -kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will currently build or work > with rpm-4.2) The *point* was, that new users should/might want to have one gui based utility do this. Or at least that was my point. One program for the user to run, not several. > > -The majority of software a user is going to use, they should be able to > find quite quickly Some yes, some no. That was the basis we were talking about. > > -You did claim windows was point-and-click-easy, so why does my girlfriend > install software easily under Mandrake, but not under Windows? There is no > global catalog of available software on Windows in any case. One example. Again the *point* was to consider making it one program. One that can both scan for installed and not installed programs. On this I thought we agreed several posts ago. Has that changed ? > > The real competition here IMHO is (from what I hear) Lindows (who has it > easy AFAIK since they run as root so there never are any problems > regarding rights etc) and possibly SuSE. Redhat also has a simple > interface, that does also show you what is installed, but there it is > definitely not fine-grained enough. Well now I am confused, or do you like to "argue" both sides of the "coin" ? Bob > > Regards, > Buchan
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
> On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote: >> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my >> best freind now >> > >> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol. >> >> Did Greg even vaguely suggest anyone else should use urpmi? Please, if >> you don't visit the list often (as you state), at least *read* the >> posts? > > Not nice. In hindsight, no ... > Now go do like your mother might suggest; and wash your mouth > out with soap. I have better things to do ... > Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up > in a discussion about newbies ? To indicate that he is not an authority on the uses and abuses of rpmdrake, since, like many cookers, he uses urpmi more than rpmdrake ... > Sorry if this sounds harse, but it was you that suggested that I > "..should at least *read* the posts" Did I miss something? >> >>I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say >> that at one point, installing Windows software is now easy because >> people are >> >> used to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know >> how to do it there either, but they had to learn. >> > >> > Well for the last 5 years or more, installing in Windows is point >> and >> >> click on >> >> > a single icon for downloaded programs. >> >> You mean on Windows I actually have to download files? How? Where? >> What if I don't like this one, where do I find another one? And if I >> can install it like that, can I uninstall it like that? And why, if I >> can uninstall everything in one place, can't I install everything from >> the same place? >> >> And what about files called .msi files? >> >> Anyway, on Mandrake, you can just double click on any rpm you >> downloaded, and it will install it, and anything it needs. >> >> Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some >> problem > > Um, again we were discussing a newbie using the rpmdrake tools to > download, and additionally to use them as a basis to discover what > software might be installed. In that context, I will just have to > disagree with your assessment of the problem, as this concerns rpmdrake > and not a download sitting on a desktop or otherwise easily seen by a > user , logged in as such user. So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be able to see what software is installed, but -kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will currently build or work with rpm-4.2) -The majority of software a user is going to use, they should be able to find quite quickly -You did claim windows was point-and-click-easy, so why does my girlfriend install software easily under Mandrake, but not under Windows? There is no global catalog of available software on Windows in any case. The real competition here IMHO is (from what I hear) Lindows (who has it easy AFAIK since they run as root so there never are any problems regarding rights etc) and possibly SuSE. Redhat also has a simple interface, that does also show you what is installed, but there it is definitely not fine-grained enough. Regards, Buchan
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > w9ya wrote: > > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 10:50 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > >>I think it is interesting that some think it is easier as two, while > > others > > >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my best > >>freind now > > > > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol. > > Did Greg even vaguely suggest anyone else should use urpmi? Please, if > you don't visit the list often (as you state), at least *read* the posts? Not nice. Now go do like your mother might suggest; and wash your mouth out with soap. Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up in a discussion about newbies ? (What is his point?, and how is it germane ?) Sorry if this sounds harse, but it was you that suggested that I "..should at least *read* the posts" > > >>>2 - Installing ahs nothing to do with "how do I start a program" etc. > >>>i.e. > >> > >>Sure it does. Once it's installed, how do I start it. > >> > >>>Or put another way; if a user can use some other op system's installer > >>>without having to think about it, and a linux system can be even better > >>>by being more infomative but just as easy to use, then it is a win-win > >>>situation. > >> > >>I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say that at > >>one point, installing Windows software is now easy because people are > >> used to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know how to > >> do it there either, but they had to learn. > > > > Well for the last 5 years or more, installing in Windows is point and > > click on > > > a single icon for downloaded programs. > > You mean on Windows I actually have to download files? How? Where? What > if I don't like this one, where do I find another one? And if I can > install it like that, can I uninstall it like that? And why, if I can > uninstall everything in one place, can't I install everything from the > same place? > > And what about files called .msi files? > > Anyway, on Mandrake, you can just double click on any rpm you > downloaded, and it will install it, and anything it needs. > > Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some > problem Um, again we were discussing a newbie using the rpmdrake tools to download, and additionally to use them as a basis to discover what software might be installed. In that context, I will just have to disagree with your assessment of the problem, as this concerns rpmdrake and not a download sitting on a desktop or otherwise easily seen by a user , logged in as such user. > > > It doesn't get any easier than that, > > unless you get really creative. i.e. One program to get and install > > software. > > Windows (until the Windows installer) had one program for each one you > wanted to install. With msi, it's slightly better, but not much. > > > Now make that same program tell me about what I already have and you > > have a > > > winner. > > Yes, this I agree with, but please don't punt Windows as being the > utopia of software installation, it can't even tell me which program > installed the mess of dll's all over my system. If it was, we wouldn't > need so many MCSEs. > > Buchan I am glad we can get to this point. It is nice when mandrakers can best agree on what etc. Bob > > - -- > > |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| > > Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager > Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 > Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za > GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc > 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQE+8DBurJK6UGDSBKcRArA9AJ9ioTKa0rblXmtUdPJkK1i0XogQoQCfZaG1 > mKBbSXeGQVAqoe/Tf0d26Jc= > =ZCFj > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > ** > Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our > e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. > **
Re: double-clicking on files directly from CD's [was: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software]
Luca Berra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of > > failing > > not sure of that, if i have an option that has a meaning, and it > changes name (for whatever reason) I'd like to be notified early, > not having to hunt problem for an option that was ignored. This is currently not homogeneous among filesystems anyway :/. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Thursday 19 June 2003 18:08, Buchan Milne wrote: > andre wrote: > > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 11:42, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > >>Buchan's suggestion was not for selecting rpm's, it was for > >>allowing non-root users to browse, so that afterwards they can > >>request software installation to the machine's administrator. > > > > For which rpmdrake is totally inappropriate. For that you have to also > > know > > > what is installed otherwise you get this conversation: > > > > user>Can i have obscure-email-program > > admin>Isn't kmail or evolution good enough? > > user>I didn't see them > > Somehow, I think it is more likely they would find it in the menus under > Networking->Mail first ... > > I would users to ask questions like that, than have them trying to > compile something from freshmeat because they didn't know it was > packaged already. > > Buchan > It may not be the best example. But the number of people who can't find k3d in rpmdrake because it already installed is definitely non-zero
Re: double-clicking on files directly from CD's [was: Re: [Cooker]rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software]
Pixel wrote: Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Pixel do you think we can add mode=0644 for cd and dvd drives, in the install, with the above mentioned addition in mount.c? no pb. IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of failing not sure of that, if i have an option that has a meaning, and it changes name (for whatever reason) I'd like to be notified early, not having to hunt problem for an option that was ignored. regards L.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 andre wrote: > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 11:42, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > >>Buchan's suggestion was not for selecting rpm's, it was for >>allowing non-root users to browse, so that afterwards they can >>request software installation to the machine's administrator. > > For which rpmdrake is totally inappropriate. For that you have to also know > what is installed otherwise you get this conversation: > > user>Can i have obscure-email-program > admin>Isn't kmail or evolution good enough? > user>I didn't see them > Somehow, I think it is more likely they would find it in the menus under Networking->Mail first ... I would users to ask questions like that, than have them trying to compile something from freshmeat because they didn't know it was packaged already. Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD4DBQE+8eAFrJK6UGDSBKcRAgoMAJ9mpyJzIvZr6ILw6buCIvSC3+IIcQCY8l1G yHKn6NlmR3s1aRBT+jA/nQ== =ULMZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
Le jeu 19/06/2003 à 07:08, Götz Waschk a écrit : > Am Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2003, 12:51:48 Uhr MET, schrieb FACORAT Fabrice: > > Now I just want to make an assumption : users should not have access to > > package file list or at least for core or important or server software. > > To my mind it is a security risk as users doesn't need to knwo where > > they are. Maybe binary/doc for common packages but for core > > packages/server/critical packages they should not see them. > > You can limit the access to the rpm command if you are that paranoid, but > I don't understand why this could be a security problem. security by obscurity
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Le jeu 19/06/2003 à 10:19, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit : > FACORAT Fabrice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Le mar 17/06/2003 à 22:10, andre a écrit : > > > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > > > > > > Argh. "another addition to the GUI".. > > > > > > > More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for > > > non-root users to select rpms. > > > > That's sounds sensible to me IMHO. > > Indeed users need to know which packages are installed and which ones > > can be installed, and for this need search features ( name, category, > > summary, origin ). > > So the best way is to do a separate tool. keep rpmdrake and > > rpmdrake-remove small ( so don't need to increase startup time ). > > Do a separate tool ( application finder, Drake Carpet, or whatever u > > want ) this one will have a longer startup time ( to compute installed > > and uninstalled packages ), one window, search criteria, grouping. > > Search results precise if package is installed or not ( with a color or > > with a checkbox ) and of course description of the package. > > It's highly unprobable I'm going to maintain a separate tool like > that :). Just a question : do u think it will be very hard to implement it ? in fact with this tool u just need to browse. No installation or removal, no need to show packages dependencies ( even if it may be very interesting a little bit as with dselect ), no ... In fact it is very complicated because this tool is usefull only if you can see the dependencies of the package ... Finally u may be right, it will be a hard job ...
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Wednesday 18 June 2003 11:42, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Buchan's suggestion was not for selecting rpm's, it was for > allowing non-root users to browse, so that afterwards they can > request software installation to the machine's administrator. For which rpmdrake is totally inappropriate. For that you have to also know what is installed otherwise you get this conversation: user>Can i have obscure-email-program admin>Isn't kmail or evolution good enough? user>I didn't see them
Re: double-clicking on files directly from CD's [was: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software]
Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Pixel do you think we can add mode=0644 for cd and dvd drives, in > > the install, with the above mentioned addition in mount.c? > > no pb. > > IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of failing Well, why not. Seems that some filesystems already do that (isofs.c for example). "Debugging" wrong mount options is probably easier when the mount fails, that's maybe the rationale for currenty udf.c behaviour. But I think maintaining another patch to the kernel is probably more error-prone and would add yet agin some more work to juan. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
The security problem only exist if you couldn't get that information in another way. But i don't think that is the case seeing that only /usr/sbin/glibc-post-upgrade isn't readable on my system as normal user.
Re: double-clicking on files directly from CD's [was: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software]
Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Pixel do you think we can add mode=0644 for cd and dvd drives, in > the install, with the above mentioned addition in mount.c? no pb. IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of failing
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed * software
"MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that > enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears. > > I have tried other distros and Mandrake is the best, so I'm willing to give > my time, talent, and opinion on the matter. The solution is never "go find > another distribution". > > The idea of showing what is already installed or can be installed/upgraded > would be very nice, ala SuSE Yast. Again, I want to state that I do agree that for advanced users, I do understand "old" rpmdrake is better. And, please remember, "first" rpmdrake, written in Perl by pixel, was much more simple than "old" rpmdrake. I think "old" rpmdrake was like that, because it was designed with advanced users in mind, and it followed (nice) solutions from advanced/cooker/etc users. "New" rpmdrake was designed following our belief (motivated by several user experiences and us trying to think hard what beginners would experience) that "old" rpmdrake was "frightening" and beginners had a hard time understanding the GUI at first sight. We decided that each tool needs to stay simple, do one thing and do it well, to be suitable for beginners. We also decided that DrakX approach was better (show dependencies when selecting package, not after "install" button is clicked). I think current rpmdrake is good for beginners, old one was too complicated for beginners. I understand this is frustrating for many advanced users, though a part of the rationale is also that most advanced users will tend to prefer urpmi. (Argh, I said I would not repeat myself about the whole story.. but since so many people are in the discussion in a non-aggressive manner I felt it was better to state again our main points) > Also, maybe if there is a concern about "bloat" and load time, maybe we can > enable/disable features with switches? That makes a rather large difference, I don't think maintaining such a feature under a switch will be doable in the real world. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
double-clicking on files directly from CD's [was: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software]
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some > problem Because of Windows-only CD that leads to all files being executable? I have a suggestion for that, because I've been dealing with fixing a similar problem for a friend of mine. I've been trying to use "mode=0644" as a mount option for iso9660 to fix the problem (mode= is "For non-Rock Ridge volumes, give all files the indicated mode"). It exhausted one problem though: with dvd drives, we use "auto" as the fs type, in /etc/fstab; my fix worked well when you put cd's in your dvd drive, but when you put dvd's the udf filesystem will exit with a failure because "mode=" is non supported. I think the best solution would be to extend fstab syntax so that in "auto" fs, we can specify options for only one fs, but I think this is somewhat complicated and will introduce incompatibility in a basic file such as /etc/fstab. So I've finally fixed my fix by extending mount.c capability, adding the ability to silently remove some options for some FS's (namely, mode= for udf). What do people think? Pixel do you think we can add mode=0644 for cd and dvd drives, in the install, with the above mentioned addition in mount.c? -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
FACORAT Fabrice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Le mar 17/06/2003 à 22:10, andre a écrit : > > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > > > > Argh. "another addition to the GUI".. > > > > > More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for > > non-root users to select rpms. > > That's sounds sensible to me IMHO. > Indeed users need to know which packages are installed and which ones > can be installed, and for this need search features ( name, category, > summary, origin ). > So the best way is to do a separate tool. keep rpmdrake and > rpmdrake-remove small ( so don't need to increase startup time ). > Do a separate tool ( application finder, Drake Carpet, or whatever u > want ) this one will have a longer startup time ( to compute installed > and uninstalled packages ), one window, search criteria, grouping. > Search results precise if package is installed or not ( with a color or > with a checkbox ) and of course description of the package. It's highly unprobable I'm going to maintain a separate tool like that :). -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Didier Herisson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le Mercredi 18 Juin 2003 20.05, Bellegarde Cédric a écrit :
> > I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian
> > with apt...
> >
> > For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde
> > package or an urpmi Xwindow, urpmi gnome, ...
>
> I agree with that ! And rpmdrake should then also have a classification by
> meta-package, allowing to add or remove some applications in those families.
> It's already what is done during the install process, isn'it ?
Rpmdrake's default sorting ("Mandrake Choices") is equivalent to
Packages Groups choices during install.
--
Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Didier Herisson wrote: > I agree with that ! And rpmdrake should then also have a classification by > meta-package, allowing to add or remove some applications in those families. > It's already what is done during the install process, isn'it ? Do people *really* forget to install KDE, and need to install it later? There aren't many other applications for meta packaging, since in most cases there are big packages which require everything they need (OpenOffice.org for example). If even 1% of users forget to install their favourite desktop during install, I think work would be better spent on rpmdrake's search capability. Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+8YKerJK6UGDSBKcRAnIlAKCSN9QHjdQcUdtaTRvQx+udDYMHewCghv2r 2RAvAi//cU+erWEtNt/4EGU= =HWFM -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bellegarde Cédric wrote: > I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian > with apt... > > For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde > package or an urpmi Xwindow, urpmi gnome, ... > $ urpmq -i gnome2 Name: gnome2 Version : 2.2.0 Release : 1mdk Group : Graphical desktop/GNOME Size: 0Architecture: noarch Summary : GNOME 2 desktop environment 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 ... I think there are probably a few other examples of this ... where we need virtual package names. > With this, installation of software will be easiest for newbies... The > actual problem is that newbies don't know what to install: kdebase, > kdenetwork, I wouldn't want a kde meta-package to pull in *all* of KDE though ... and I really don't think most users have problems installing X, KDE or GNOME (since you can't really miss them in the installation). And if you don't have X, I don't see how you would use rpmdrake to install it ... well, at least a newbie. Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+8XXlrJK6UGDSBKcRAgKAAKCYfFV8dSqzLRu8tYJmdpt1+Nbe+wCfSgpV eMScps6bf+Jw9vwDAt6qtFY= =N0RZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Le Mercredi 18 Juin 2003 20.05, Bellegarde Cédric a écrit : > I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian > with apt... > > For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde > package or an urpmi Xwindow, urpmi gnome, ... I agree with that ! And rpmdrake should then also have a classification by meta-package, allowing to add or remove some applications in those families. It's already what is done during the install process, isn'it ? -- Didier
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Am Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2003, 12:51:48 Uhr MET, schrieb FACORAT Fabrice: > Now I just want to make an assumption : users should not have access to > package file list or at least for core or important or server software. > To my mind it is a security risk as users doesn't need to knwo where > they are. Maybe binary/doc for common packages but for core > packages/server/critical packages they should not see them. You can limit the access to the rpm command if you are that paranoid, but I don't understand why this could be a security problem. -- What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy? Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948), "Non-Violence in Peace and War"
RE: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 15:43, MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1) wrote: > Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that > enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears. > > I have tried other distros and Mandrake is the best, so I'm willing to give > my time, talent, and opinion on the matter. The solution is never "go find > another distribution". > > The idea of showing what is already installed or can be installed/upgraded > would be very nice, ala SuSE Yast. Thank you, Cory. > Also, maybe if there is a concern about "bloat" and load time, maybe we can > enable/disable features with switches? > > Cory > --LX -- Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1 Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/
RE: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears. I have tried other distros and Mandrake is the best, so I'm willing to give my time, talent, and opinion on the matter. The solution is never "go find another distribution". The idea of showing what is already installed or can be installed/upgraded would be very nice, ala SuSE Yast. Also, maybe if there is a concern about "bloat" and load time, maybe we can enable/disable features with switches? Cory -Original Message- From: Lyvim Xaphir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 16:14, Tom Brinkman wrote: >Ya know LX, IMO, you're gettin way out'a line. First the prime > motivation for many join'n the Club was to support free (speech) > software, particularly MandrakeSoft. I know it was mine. That'n to > avoid being a freeloader. Many, as myself, contributed long before > there was a Club. Many renewed early last fall, as myself, when it > was apparent Mandrake was in trouble. No vote expected or any > other expectations, just future hope and appreciation for past > service. Get over your gripes or go for some other distro, or OS. > Either way GC doesn't deserve this kind of berating. Try'n offer > some constructive criticism that already hasn't been beat to death. Maybe you're right, Tom. But this is what I believe to be true, and if I had not come forth and stated what I believed in with no uncertain terms, then I would not have been being truthful about the matter. I'm a silver member myself and I've been passing out copies of cooker 9.1 to neighbors in order to get some help in with the testing process, so we can have a better product in the end. Because believe it or not, I do want this distro to succeed. I don't have as much investment time as the developers here, but I have been in this since almost the first release of Mandrake, and I've been pushing it on people ever since. And companies. I don't mean to step on GC, he after all is doing a good job on the project he was told to do, according to the bidding of the ephemeral "ergonomics team", whom I never heard about until today. But my frustration regarding this has been great because I just can't understand how such a dichotomy or information gap can exist between the user's statements and the development team; especially when there is a mechanism in place to address that very issue. It *does not* make sense. I am certain that there are others that have the same feelings about this, but it seems I am just one of the few that have the temerity to stick my neck out on it. But I've honestly stated my peace on this and others have stated theirs. That's what this list is all about. So if they are willing to leave things as they are then so am I. --LX -- Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1 Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/ --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.487 / Virus Database: 286 - Release Date: 6/1/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.487 / Virus Database: 286 - Release Date: 6/1/2003
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian with apt... For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde package or an urpmi Xwindow, urpmi gnome, ... With this, installation of software will be easiest for newbies... The actual problem is that newbies don't know what to install: kdebase, kdenetwork, Le mer 18/06/2003 à 03:37, w9ya a écrit : > Yesterday I was at a client's. I was installing software using the 'drake' gui > tools while they watched. The clients remarked that they were sure glad they > didn't have to install software on linux. They went on to say the they were > use to a much easier install process. They are not stupid. They are not slow. > > Bob Finch > > > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 02:14 pm, andre wrote: > > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 15:39, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > And of course, at present rpmdrake can only be run as root. If it were > > > > > > Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've > > > said I would add it, I've added it on May 28, but you didn't even > > > notice :(. > > > > The way it is implemented sucks. Not only would you expect that one would > > find a request to get root but also to find installed and uninstalled > > software if you did a search. > >
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > > Argh. "another addition to the GUI".. > > > More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for > non-root users to select rpms. I would remove your May 28 addition. Buchan's suggestion was not for selecting rpm's, it was for allowing non-root users to browse, so that afterwards they can request software installation to the machine's administrator. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Le mar 17/06/2003 à 22:10, andre a écrit : > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > > Argh. "another addition to the GUI".. > > > More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for > non-root users to select rpms. That's sounds sensible to me IMHO. Indeed users need to know which packages are installed and which ones can be installed, and for this need search features ( name, category, summary, origin ). So the best way is to do a separate tool. keep rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove small ( so don't need to increase startup time ). Do a separate tool ( application finder, Drake Carpet, or whatever u want ) this one will have a longer startup time ( to compute installed and uninstalled packages ), one window, search criteria, grouping. Search results precise if package is installed or not ( with a color or with a checkbox ) and of course description of the package. Now I just want to make an assumption : users should not have access to package file list or at least for core or important or server software. To my mind it is a security risk as users doesn't need to knwo where they are. Maybe binary/doc for common packages but for core packages/server/critical packages they should not see them.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
> 1 - The original point I was commenting on was that the 'drake' > installer was getting more complicated by being broke into several > sections. This is a fundamentally flaw concept for newbies to take > on. We can disagree on this, but having more than one program to take > care of installing and removing software might just be more involved. so, i guess you propose to have only one rpmdrake program ? Now, , for the same reason, should we unite all wizard related to Network in one super wizard ? No, i don't think. This would be confusing. But the same applies, why should people have one program to share the connection, and one to edit the firewall rules ? Don't forget that rpmdrake should not be run from the command line, but from the MCC or from kde-gnome-whatever menu. So, of course, they are two separate program, but, since they are designed to be launched as module in the mcc, this make sense. I agree, maybe mandrake lacks a powerful package management graphical tool, but, since ressources are scarce, they needed to choose between newbie and more advanced user, and clearly, they favored the newbie. -- Michaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 10:50 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 11:28 pm, w9ya wrote: > > Well, I will disagree for two reasons; > > > > 1 - The original point I was commenting on was that the 'drake' installer > > was getting more complicated by being broke into several sections. This > > is a fundamentally flaw concept for newbies to take on. We can disagree > > on this, but having more than one program to take care of installing and > > removing software might just be more involved. > > I think it is interesting that some think it is easier as two, while others > find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my best > freind now Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol. > > > 2 - Installing ahs nothing to do with "how do I start a program" etc. > > i.e. > > Sure it does. Once it's installed, how do I start it. > > > Or put another way; if a user can use some other op system's installer > > without having to think about it, and a linux system can be even better > > by being more infomative but just as easy to use, then it is a win-win > > situation. > > I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say that at > one point, installing Windows software is now easy because people are used > to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know how to do it > there either, but they had to learn. Well for the last 5 years or more, installing in Windows is point and click on a single icon for downloaded programs. It doesn't get any easier than that, unless you get really creative. i.e. One program to get and install software. Now make that same program tell me about what I already have and you have a winner. > > > > When people criticise Linux for being hard for Windows users, they are > > > really criticizing it for being unfamiliar to Windows users. Try this. > > > Take a typical home Windows user and change the desktop theme so the > > > background and icons are different, and then move their desktop icons > > > to different locations. I give you a 75% chance that they won't know > > > what to do. IMO, if you want mass adoption, you have to make it easy > > > and making it easy means making it familiar. I'm not advocating that, > > > but I think it a truth. > > > > Um, you are way out of field on this. In fact many users of m$ op systems > > change their themes, but cannot fathom adding software to linux. I know, > > this is what I do for a living. > > My experience is different, and I do it for a living too. I've even seen > some users call for help when we switched machines from Win98 to Win2k and > the only thing different about the desktop layout and menu was the > background color. Win98 green vs. Win2k blue. Happened twice. Well the users I worked with the other day are beyond that, as I stated in my original post. Or rather as I implied. They can and do work with Windows, but as stated above, they do not have to go thru the more involved linux procedures. The bottom line, it is more steps and more work to use the current two or more program 'drake' system. > > > > BTW, remove your reply-to setting, it's causing replies to your Cooker > > > messages to get addressed to you personally. > > > > Nah, because I do more than just work this mailing list. In fact I seldom > > actually send mail here. Thanxs anyways. You might try to just work > > around it. I do on other people's mail all the time. > > I wasn't trying to be snotty, I have just found that many people do not > realize the reply-to is set in their client and in 99% of the cases it is > set to the same address as the From field (as yours is), in which case a > reply-to is totally unecessary, but this is way OT, so I'll apologize for > coming across as an elitist snot and leave it at that. No offense taken. Sorry if I came off the same way. Bob
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 11:28 pm, w9ya wrote: > > Well, I will disagree for two reasons; > > 1 - The original point I was commenting on was that the 'drake' installer > was getting more complicated by being broke into several sections. This is > a fundamentally flaw concept for newbies to take on. We can disagree on > this, but having more than one program to take care of installing and > removing software might just be more involved. I think it is interesting that some think it is easier as two, while others find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my best freind now. > > 2 - Installing ahs nothing to do with "how do I start a program" etc. i.e. Sure it does. Once it's installed, how do I start it. > Or put another way; if a user can use some other op system's installer > without having to think about it, and a linux system can be even better by > being more infomative but just as easy to use, then it is a win-win > situation. I don't disagree with your points here. I was only trying to say that at one point, installing Windows software is now easy because people are used to it after all these years. At one point, they didn't know how to do it there either, but they had to learn. > > When people criticise Linux for being hard for Windows users, they are > > really criticizing it for being unfamiliar to Windows users. Try this. > > Take a typical home Windows user and change the desktop theme so the > > background and icons are different, and then move their desktop icons to > > different locations. I give you a 75% chance that they won't know what to > > do. IMO, if you want mass adoption, you have to make it easy and making > > it easy means making it familiar. I'm not advocating that, but I think > > it a truth. > > Um, you are way out of field on this. In fact many users of m$ op systems > change their themes, but cannot fathom adding software to linux. I know, > this is what I do for a living. > My experience is different, and I do it for a living too. I've even seen some users call for help when we switched machines from Win98 to Win2k and the only thing different about the desktop layout and menu was the background color. Win98 green vs. Win2k blue. Happened twice. > > BTW, remove your reply-to setting, it's causing replies to your Cooker > > messages to get addressed to you personally. > > Nah, because I do more than just work this mailing list. In fact I seldom > actually send mail here. Thanxs anyways. You might try to just work around > it. I do on other people's mail all the time. > I wasn't trying to be snotty, I have just found that many people do not realize the reply-to is set in their client and in 99% of the cases it is set to the same address as the From field (as yours is), in which case a reply-to is totally unecessary, but this is way OT, so I'll apologize for coming across as an elitist snot and leave it at that. -- Greg
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 09:16 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 09:37 pm, w9ya wrote: > > Yesterday I was at a client's. I was installing software using the > > 'drake' gui tools while they watched. The clients remarked that they were > > sure glad they didn't have to install software on linux. They went on to > > say the they were use to a much easier install process. They are not > > stupid. They are not slow. > > My personal opinion is that this has to do with familiarity and not > difficulty. Installing software is not difficult if you evaluate the tasks > that go into it. I think if you had a user that had never experienced > Windows and asked them to install something on XP they would have the exact > same reaction and have the same questions. How do you start the installer? > What is this C-drive? How do I start the program?, etc. Well, I will disagree for two reasons; 1 - The original point I was commenting on was that the 'drake' installer was getting more complicated by being broke into several sections. This is a fundamentally flaw concept for newbies to take on. We can disagree on this, but having more than one program to take care of installing and removing software might just be more involved. 2 - Installing ahs nothing to do with "how do I start a program" etc. i.e. A user use to m$ systems only asks to install a program. I think the earlier point about having one program that can scan on a keyword such as "email" and let the user know what is currently installed, what it is called, where in the menu(s) it is located as well as what might be available to install, along with a one button install would be ideal. Or put another way; if a user can use some other op system's installer without having to think about it, and a linux system can be even better by being more infomative but just as easy to use, then it is a win-win situation. > > When people criticise Linux for being hard for Windows users, they are > really criticizing it for being unfamiliar to Windows users. Try this. > Take a typical home Windows user and change the desktop theme so the > background and icons are different, and then move their desktop icons to > different locations. I give you a 75% chance that they won't know what to > do. IMO, if you want mass adoption, you have to make it easy and making it > easy means making it familiar. I'm not advocating that, but I think it a > truth. Um, you are way out of field on this. In fact many users of m$ op systems change their themes, but cannot fathom adding software to linux. I know, this is what I do for a living. > > BTW, remove your reply-to setting, it's causing replies to your Cooker > messages to get addressed to you personally. Nah, because I do more than just work this mailing list. In fact I seldom actually send mail here. Thanxs anyways. You might try to just work around it. I do on other people's mail all the time. Best Regards; Bob Finch
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 09:37 pm, w9ya wrote: > Yesterday I was at a client's. I was installing software using the 'drake' > gui tools while they watched. The clients remarked that they were sure glad > they didn't have to install software on linux. They went on to say the they > were use to a much easier install process. They are not stupid. They are > not slow. > My personal opinion is that this has to do with familiarity and not difficulty. Installing software is not difficult if you evaluate the tasks that go into it. I think if you had a user that had never experienced Windows and asked them to install something on XP they would have the exact same reaction and have the same questions. How do you start the installer? What is this C-drive? How do I start the program?, etc. When people criticise Linux for being hard for Windows users, they are really criticizing it for being unfamiliar to Windows users. Try this. Take a typical home Windows user and change the desktop theme so the background and icons are different, and then move their desktop icons to different locations. I give you a 75% chance that they won't know what to do. IMO, if you want mass adoption, you have to make it easy and making it easy means making it familiar. I'm not advocating that, but I think it a truth. BTW, remove your reply-to setting, it's causing replies to your Cooker messages to get addressed to you personally. -- Greg
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
Yesterday I was at a client's. I was installing software using the 'drake' gui tools while they watched. The clients remarked that they were sure glad they didn't have to install software on linux. They went on to say the they were use to a much easier install process. They are not stupid. They are not slow. Bob Finch On Tuesday 17 June 2003 02:14 pm, andre wrote: > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 15:39, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > And of course, at present rpmdrake can only be run as root. If it were > > > > Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've > > said I would add it, I've added it on May 28, but you didn't even > > notice :(. > > The way it is implemented sucks. Not only would you expect that one would > find a request to get root but also to find installed and uninstalled > software if you did a search.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
For what it is worth, I liked the interface of rpmdrake from 8.2 better than the 9.0 9.1 stuff. I did complain about 8.2 at that time that I found the install/remove being on the same button confusing. But I find the current rpmdrake more confusing, being 4 separate programs with much related functionality: install remove mandrakeupdate and sources administration. I would rather have all of that in one program/interface. Maybe you could look at synaptic for some ideas on how it could be done. And I am as an experienced user / mirror maintainer / software architecht for best dissemination of Linux wannabe - also sometimes confused about that I cannot find some software to install, when the package already is installed. best regards keld
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Argh. "another addition to the GUI".. > More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for non-root users to select rpms. I would remove your May 28 addition.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 21:04, Buchan Milne wrote: > Michael Scherer wrote: > > Now, if you want someting more feature full, I will package > > synaptics once apt-get will compile on cooker. > > Then, just vote for someone to backport it in 9.1. > > $ urpmq -i apt > > [ apt ] > > No idea if it works on rpm-4.2 ... The current package should be updated with the lastest version. It compile without problem ( apt-0.5.5cnc6 ), i tested yesterday. Now, i don't know if all mirror are apt ready. It would be nice to give the choice. > Texstar had synaptic packages for 9.1. yes, but I did't find the SRPMS ( well, i did the package before searching, and i did not search too much ). -- Mickaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 16:14, Tom Brinkman wrote: >Ya know LX, IMO, you're gettin way out'a line. First the prime > motivation for many join'n the Club was to support free (speech) > software, particularly MandrakeSoft. I know it was mine. That'n to > avoid being a freeloader. Many, as myself, contributed long before > there was a Club. Many renewed early last fall, as myself, when it > was apparent Mandrake was in trouble. No vote expected or any > other expectations, just future hope and appreciation for past > service. Get over your gripes or go for some other distro, or OS. > Either way GC doesn't deserve this kind of berating. Try'n offer > some constructive criticism that already hasn't been beat to death. Maybe you're right, Tom. But this is what I believe to be true, and if I had not come forth and stated what I believed in with no uncertain terms, then I would not have been being truthful about the matter. I'm a silver member myself and I've been passing out copies of cooker 9.1 to neighbors in order to get some help in with the testing process, so we can have a better product in the end. Because believe it or not, I do want this distro to succeed. I don't have as much investment time as the developers here, but I have been in this since almost the first release of Mandrake, and I've been pushing it on people ever since. And companies. I don't mean to step on GC, he after all is doing a good job on the project he was told to do, according to the bidding of the ephemeral "ergonomics team", whom I never heard about until today. But my frustration regarding this has been great because I just can't understand how such a dichotomy or information gap can exist between the user's statements and the development team; especially when there is a mechanism in place to address that very issue. It *does not* make sense. I am certain that there are others that have the same feelings about this, but it seems I am just one of the few that have the temerity to stick my neck out on it. But I've honestly stated my peace on this and others have stated theirs. That's what this list is all about. So if they are willing to leave things as they are then so am I. --LX -- Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk Linux Mandrake 9.1 Enlightenment-0.16.5-12mdk Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Linux User #268899 http://counter.li.org/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> Noted. But the topic is not really business strategy from my viewpoint;
> it's the impact that the Club has or does not have on development.
>
I don't think it encompasses all aspects of club effects on development,
merely the one you want to discuss (feedback on "test" rpms to some
packages makes a big difference to some things also BTW).
>>
>>Are MandrakeClub members the only people who pay (commercially)?
>
> Who knows whether commercial or non-member contributors have impact when
> the real source of the decisions ("ergonomics team") have no
> explanations or discussions forthcoming on the forums or the polls?
>
Those people who bring up their concerns know ... but yes, some aspects
of development could be more open, then again they could also be more
closed (like other distros).
>>That's an unfounded statement, many users interact on this list and via
>>bugzilla.
>
>
> Not completely unfounded, Buchan. It is based on what GC has already
> stated, which is that he was unaware of the polls existence and
> therefore of any discussion surrounding the polls. As far as he knew,
> it was not the cosmetics of the interface that was the issue, it was
> reworking rpmdrake 1.4 from the backend on up, reforming existing old
> code, and that is not what was being asked for. The cosmetics were
> always the issue, nothing more; but none of this ever percolated over to
> the developers.
>
Read the cooker archives, and you will see this is not the case. Most of
the concerns about the UI were brought to cooker by club members.
And you seem to be misrepresenting the poll, since there seems not to
have been a real "poll". gc was informed of the large number of votes
for rpmdrake 1.4, and the fact that it was because the UI had changed
(not the rewrite).
> That's because in the surveys, nobody was ever asked about their
> rpmdrake preferences.
So they were not in a real "poll".
> You won't see the polls in the rpm package voting
> either because they were shut down, and that's where the UI voting took
> place. Probably because nobody had a survey to go to. Therefore they
> created one.
>
Well, the majority of the content of the issues from the voting on
rpmdrake were discussed.
>
> I agree, but I also think that developers should be aware of what the
> user's wishes are regarding the item that they are developing.
>
They are. Note a lot of features in Mandrakesoft tools have been
user-requested.
>
>>3)MandrakeClub's primary reason for existence is to give people who get
>>their distro via alternate means (downloading etc) an easy way to give
>>back, with the possibility of influencing the development, and for other
>>possible added benefits, and is advertised only as such.
>
>
> The way it is advertised verbatim is as "a place where your voice will
> be heard." In this case no one was asked, the users brought it up
> themselves of their own free will because of their concern, and they
> were not heard or recognized.
>
Sorry, but this is not true.
>
> We seem to be discussing a development problem, since it is a problem
> that concerns development.
Well, thus far has not covered anything that has not been discussed before.
A quick search on marc.theaimsgroup.com returned a lot of unfriendly
threads, however most concerns from MandrakeClub were brought up:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10291821302&r=1&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10284633051&r=1&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mandrake-cooker&m=102922655407735&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10293154001&r=1&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10425393864&r=1&w=2
(I still didn't find the threads I was looking for, as I am sure Danny
mentioned the rpmdrake1.4 entry from Club voting at some stage).
In short, I don't think any issues Club members may have have gone
undiscussed ...
Buchan
- --
|--Another happy Mandrake Club member--|
Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager
Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202
Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za
GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc
1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE+74XCrJK6UGDSBKcRAk6jAJ9P4YUlYfHSLGzIiDojtZ9kLYwsWwCffpss
mKyouvrP5aqS0kKant1ra/Q=
=e8EC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
**
Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our
e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy.
**
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:53, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Please note, this is a development list, if you want a list for
> "Mandrakesoft business strategy", maybe you can find someone to host
> such as list, but this one is not for discussing Mandrakesoft business
> strategy, and I am quite sure no posts to this list by and Mandrakesoft
> employee should be taken as company policy ...
Noted. But the topic is not really business strategy from my viewpoint;
it's the impact that the Club has or does not have on development.
>
> Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 13:29, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> >
>
> > Which is a moot point since if you are not going to pay any attention to
> > users that have *purchased* a vote, what then convinces anyone that you
> > will put a priority on users that HAVE NOT purchased a vote? Who you are
> > *not* listening to anyway any more than the paying ones?
> >
> > Basically your paragraph above is another way of saying that basically
> > the MandrakeClub users' opinions have no impact greater than the other
> > (non-paying) users,
>
> What about users who are not members, but contribute (not financially)
> to Mandrakesoft?
>
> Are MandrakeClub members the only people who pay (commercially)?
Who knows whether commercial or non-member contributors have impact when
the real source of the decisions ("ergonomics team") have no
explanations or discussions forthcoming on the forums or the polls?
>
> > again about whose wishes you are as ignorant as the
> > Mandrakeclub user's wishes and polls, and thus further emphasizes what I
> > have been saying for some time now, which is that the money that Club
> > members pay puts absolutely NO priority on their voting input/opinions
> > and therefore can be equated to being the same thing as a propaganda
> > scam. Thanks and no thanks for the vindication.
> >
>
> Sorry, but the voting for RPMS for 9.1 did influence the packages that
> were put in the main distro and included in PowerPack (which does not
> inlcude all of contrib). Search the archives for that.
This is true; I had in mind the rpmdrake issue when I wrote that, and it
would have been better stated giving credence to the impact that package
votes do have.
>
> >>I wasn't even aware of the results of the presence and results of
> >>those polls. I was only aware that people wanted that we rebuild
> >>8.2 version on more recent releases.
> >
> >
> > Let me get this straight. You are a Mandrakesoft developer and are
> > completely unaware of what the MandrakeClub user/members wishes are with
> > regard to the Mandrake Distribution, and some of it's interfaces which
> > you are responsible for developing.
>
> That's an unfounded statement, many users interact on this list and via
> bugzilla.
Not completely unfounded, Buchan. It is based on what GC has already
stated, which is that he was unaware of the polls existence and
therefore of any discussion surrounding the polls. As far as he knew,
it was not the cosmetics of the interface that was the issue, it was
reworking rpmdrake 1.4 from the backend on up, reforming existing old
code, and that is not what was being asked for. The cosmetics were
always the issue, nothing more; but none of this ever percolated over to
the developers.
>
> > Further, as a developer and a
> > person responsible for key user interfaces you are completely unaware of
> > paying Mandrake club user/member vote polls that explain Mandrake club
> > user/member preferences regarding said key user interfaces, even though
> > you are a paid employee of Mandrakesoft, the same company that created
> > the Mandrakeclub and the Mandrakeclub polls. (???)
> >
>
> 1)As far as I can see, there has been no poll on "Do you prefer the UI
> from rpmdrake in 8.2 to the new version".
>
> Maybe you can show me, since I don't see it here:
> http://www.mandrakeclub.com/pollBooth.php
That's because in the surveys, nobody was ever asked about their
rpmdrake preferences. You won't see the polls in the rpm package voting
either because they were shut down, and that's where the UI voting took
place. Probably because nobody had a survey to go to. Therefore they
created one.
>
> 2)MandrakeClub should be responsible for ensuring that this input is
> communicated to the development team, who handle requests from other
> users also, many who contribute in various ways. The developers
> shouldn't necessarily be repsonsible for tracking everything that
> happens on MandrakeClub.
I agree, but I also think that developers should be aware of what the
user's wishes are regarding the item that they are developing.
>
> 3)MandrakeClub's primary reason for existence is to give people who get
> their distro via alternate means (downloading etc) an easy way to give
> back, with the possibility of influencing the development, and for other
> possible added benefits, and is advertised only as such.
The way it is adver
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 15:39, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > And of course, at present rpmdrake can only be run as root. If it were > > > > Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've > > said I would add it, I've added it on May 28, but you didn't even > > notice :(. > > The way it is implemented sucks. Not only would you expect that one would find :/. > a request to get root but also to find installed and uninstalled software if Argh. "another addition to the GUI".. > you did a search. Suddenly I feel s tired. -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday June 17 2003 01:09 pm, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > Which is a moot point since if you are not going to pay any > attention to users that have *purchased* a vote, what then > convinces anyone that you will put a priority on users that HAVE > NOT purchased a vote? Who you are *not* listening to anyway any > more than the paying ones? <> > Let me get this straight. You are a Mandrakesoft developer and > are completely unaware of what the MandrakeClub user/members > wishes are with regard to the Mandrake Distribution, and some of > it's interfaces which you are responsible for developing. > Further, as a developer and a person responsible for key user > interfaces you are completely unaware of paying Mandrake club > user/member vote polls that explain Mandrake club user/member > preferences regarding said key user interfaces, even though you > are a paid employee of Mandrakesoft, the same company that > created the Mandrakeclub and the Mandrakeclub polls. (???) > > I'm just going to stop digging with this one shovel and let you > do all the work since you are digging your own hole now with > three backhoes and a bulldozer. > > --LX Ya know LX, IMO, you're gettin way out'a line. First the prime motivation for many join'n the Club was to support free (speech) software, particularly MandrakeSoft. I know it was mine. That'n to avoid being a freeloader. Many, as myself, contributed long before there was a Club. Many renewed early last fall, as myself, when it was apparent Mandrake was in trouble. No vote expected or any other expectations, just future hope and appreciation for past service. Get over your gripes or go for some other distro, or OS. Either way GC doesn't deserve this kind of berating. Try'n offer some constructive criticism that already hasn't been beat to death. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:32, Michael Scherer wrote: > > To make it crystal clear the point is that the money flow from the > Mandrakeclub members is the most potent source of revenue that > Mandrakesoft has, which I don't hesitate to reiterate even though I > don't believe that you really don't see the point. > Please, take this discussion somewhere else, this is not a customer support list, or a MandrakeClub list, it is a development list. Bug reports, patches, well-motivated feature-requests and other contributions are the way we progress, not long discussions of what influence Club members should have directly on developers. If you can point us to the poll you have been telling us so much about (I can't remember one, and can't find it), post a well-considered feature request, then maybe someone who takes the time to make contributions will put it in the wiki (http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/wiki). But this discussion thus far has not been of any value yet (since many of us are Club members, contributors, and customers, so you can't really claim to tell us anything we are not aware of - although a lot of us are very busy and may have missed something). Regards, Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+73lOrJK6UGDSBKcRAi+zAJ9SzRvZK3xbZH0+bKmD7MwJJtRmfwCeOERZ vbuRcFEQ2eQb1lgiwofUy1M= =Ua6J -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:32, Michael Scherer wrote: > > > I don't like mandrakeclub much. > > > > But you like their money, right? Maybe you don't like your mother, > > but she gave birth to you, so you at least owe her a nod. > > Well, I don't think that Mandrakeclub give birth to Guillaume, so, I > don't realy see the point. If I wanted to start a flame wars, this > would be exactly the type of argument i would use. > Personal, without any link to the debat. To make it crystal clear the point is that the money flow from the Mandrakeclub members is the most potent source of revenue that Mandrakesoft has, which I don't hesitate to reiterate even though I don't believe that you really don't see the point. > > Same goes > > for Mandrakeclub; these people paid money for a voice and votes so > > that they can have some input in the direction(s) that the Mandrake > > distro goes in; but more pointedly it is the most pristine source for > > Mandrakesoft revenue presently in existence. This attitude towards > > people who gratuitously give money in return for a promise to be > > recognized with their votes is exactly the problem that will be the > > downfall of the Mandrake distro if it happens. > > First, the problem is that some people are totaly disconnected from the > reality. > To give a example : > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mandrake-cooker&m=105275177502616&w=2 > > People need to know what can be achieved and what cannot be. If you're trying to tell me that the cosmetics of a gtk interface can't be altered more towards what was voted on then I'm going to tell you that you're one of those people that's disconnected from the reality. > > Secund, IIRC, people votes are taken in account, for the cd 3, to give > a example. > They can also vote for RPMS. > > So, because a mandrake developper don't want to do exactly what _you_ > want, without any good argument, you say that they are not listening ? Well, you are doing nothing but proving the point that you are *not listening*, because the whole discussion has been about polls, and not me personally. As a matter of fact, in this thread I have not even spoken of a personal preference; which underscores the fact that you do not listen, even when the text is right in front of you in black and white. As far as the argument goes, it was discussed in the polls, which you haven't read cause you don't care to read. If the developers say they are not listening or that they are unaware of the user's wishes, then I certainly will believe that since it is commiserant with the reality I've seen in progress. GC has already stated as much and your attitude here does nothing to dispel what's already been said. > > The voters for Rpmdrake 1.4 were clearly and precisely stating their > > preference for the UI cosmetics. Yet the polls for both 9.0 and 9.1 > > were closed, even in the face of totally overwhelming and widespread > > public opinion FOR the old cosmetics/functionality. > > If asked, people would all like to have tax cut. So, public opion is not > always good. Yet tax cuts are better for everyone except those elitist beaurocrats and/or tyrants (such as Saddam Hussein) that get their coffers stuffed from the money taken from the citizens; and tax cuts stimulate the economy, as evidenced by current events in the US with the stock market, which is now out the roof. Tax money is the people's money, not the government's money; so if you treat it like it is the people's money, then the people will be the ones that benefit. Which allows both the government AND the people to benefit, as opposed to just the tyrants and beaurocrats benefiting. So once again you torpedo your own argument with a really self sacrificial anology. The public should be allowed to determine what is good for the public by majority vote, and it should not be determined by a group of elitists who never talk, interface, or desire to be with everyday users and most especially beginners. This is the reason that the Mandrakeclub polls exist. You have yet to justify why cosmetic issues voted on by paying Club members is irrevelant. > People who were asked are not the same that the one who discover a huge > and complicated program for the first time. > > I don't use rpmdrake, but I feel it is clearer. > > Now, if you want someting more feature full, I will package synaptics > once apt-get will compile on cooker. > Then, just vote for someone to backport it in 9.1. Listen, my main thing is the voters and the democratic process purchased by the voters. I appreciate your offers here, but I don't think the main danger is or ever has been finding enough fingers to plug the mud dam. The real problem is the setting of a bad precedent by not recognizing polls contributed to by paying voters! There is very clearly a horrid and illogical disconnect between developers responsible for creating the interface and the Club users describing the kind of interface that they want
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 19:09, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > Which is a moot point since if you are not going to pay any attention to > users that have *purchased* a vote, what then convinces anyone that you > will put a priority on users that HAVE NOT purchased a vote? Who you are > *not* listening to anyway any more than the paying ones? Jesus Christ. Will you please take your fucking personal vendetta elsewhere and stop polluting this list? It is entirely off-topic. -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 15:39, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > And of course, at present rpmdrake can only be run as root. If it were > > Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've > said I would add it, I've added it on May 28, but you didn't even > notice :(. > The way it is implemented sucks. Not only would you expect that one would find a request to get root but also to find installed and uninstalled software if you did a search.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > about this before. There was also a post about the slow search (to which > > didn't quite satisfactory answer IM0, why is kpackage quicker in searching > > than rpmdrake? Do you think it can be optimized?) > > what kpackage search? rpmdrake-remove search in names and > descriptions is lightning fast, which is equivalent to what > kpackage does I suppose? search in files is a little bit slower > but still ok. > > slower searches are in hdlist's but that doesn't compare to > kpackage, or I've been living inside water the last years? duh..my fault, being stupid. I just tested and it is more or less equal, except ofcourse if you search uninstalled files. kpackage can only to that on local drives. rpmdrake uses hdlists. Please forget about my complaining, search speed is fine! d.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Michael Scherer wrote: > Now, if you want someting more feature full, I will package synaptics > once apt-get will compile on cooker. > Then, just vote for someone to backport it in 9.1. > $ urpmq -i apt extracting apt-0.5.5cnc4.1-3mdk.i586 Name: apt Version : 0.5.5cnc4.1 Release : 3mdk Group : System/Configuration/Packaging Size: 906914 Architecture: i586 Source RPM : apt-0.5.5cnc4.1-3mdk.src.rpm Build Host: klama.mandrake.org Packager: David Walluck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Summary : Debian's Advanced Packaging Tool with RPM support Description : A port of Debian's apt tools for RPM based distributions, or at least for Conectiva. It provides the apt-get utility that provides a simpler, safer way to install and upgrade packages. APT features complete installation ordering, multiple source capability and several other unique features. Under development, use at your own risk! No idea if it works on rpm-4.2 ... Texstar had synaptic packages for 9.1. - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD4DBQE+72YorJK6UGDSBKcRAoZBAKDB4iMhhemSB81q/OOO/lzp7FxbugCXXMcB PLyI9obMF1WVs9Vad+sKDA== =00SY -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Lyvim Xaphir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > gratuitously give money in return for a promise to be recognized with > > their votes is exactly the problem that will be the downfall of the > > Mandrake distro if it happens. > > MandrakeClub users are people who paid money on MandrakeClub to > become MandrakeClub members. They are far from being exactly our > users. I don't discuss the fact they need be recognized for the > money they gave. Our users are not limited to MandrakeClub > people, that's all. true enough, but next to the maillinglists it is the primary way of interactive communication with your (non-corporate) users. > > > The voters for Rpmdrake 1.4 were clearly and precisely stating their > > preference for the UI cosmetics. Yet the polls for both 9.0 and 9.1 > > were closed, even in the face of totally overwhelming and widespread > > public opinion FOR the old cosmetics/functionality. > > I wasn't even aware of the results of the presence and results of > those polls. I was only aware that people wanted that we rebuild > 8.2 version on more recent releases. Well there are many things suggested that we (=the volunteers) sometimes silently refuse, because we know why such a thing isn't in the distro in the first place, but it does indicate that a lot of people liked some features of the old version. > > [snipped yelling/trolling] > > Yelling doesn't encourage me to discuss with points. Since I've > already stated multiple times the reasons that back rpmdrake's > decisions, I'm not going to repeat myself again just for you. agreed, rpmdrake did become much nicer, consistenter and easier. > > > The purpose of the voting forums is to get a quantifiable idea of what > > the paying members want, which is exactly what the Mandrake distro needs > > more than anything else right now. Yet in the case of rpmdrake this > > primary directive was soiled and corrupted when the Mandrakeclub > > member's voices were ignored, then silenced by gagging the rpmdrake > > polls; both 9.0 and 9.1. This gives the distinct impression that the > > MandrakeClub is a valuable input for development, and I think > that when taking development decisions, we probably use far too > less that very input. I do not agree with Lyvim's idea that the votes were ignored. I know that many people in the company have a different opinion on what exactly the club should (or should not) be. That's fine. It was perhaps a mistake to promise that all votes would be honoured exactly (this would mean a democratically runned company, quite a novellety, but perhaps not viable?). BUT, I do think input from club members should be used a bit more. So I am happy to see you (gc) agree, even although you stated you didn't like club. > [snip] > > Aleluya! At last an evidence that the world conspiracy was for > real! > ROFL!! d.
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
> > I don't like mandrakeclub much.
>
> But you like their money, right? Maybe you don't like your mother,
> but she gave birth to you, so you at least owe her a nod.
Well, I don't think that Mandrakeclub give birth to Guillaume, so, I
don't realy see the point. If I wanted to start a flame wars, this
would be exactly the type of argument i would use.
Personal, without any link to the debat.
> Same goes
> for Mandrakeclub; these people paid money for a voice and votes so
> that they can have some input in the direction(s) that the Mandrake
> distro goes in; but more pointedly it is the most pristine source for
> Mandrakesoft revenue presently in existence. This attitude towards
> people who gratuitously give money in return for a promise to be
> recognized with their votes is exactly the problem that will be the
> downfall of the Mandrake distro if it happens.
First, the problem is that some people are totaly disconnected from the
reality.
To give a example :
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mandrake-cooker&m=105275177502616&w=2
People need to know what can be achieved and what cannot be.
Secund, IIRC, people votes are taken in account, for the cd 3, to give
a example.
They can also vote for RPMS.
So, because a mandrake developper don't want to do exactly what _you_
want, without any good argument, you say that they are not listening ?
> The voters for Rpmdrake 1.4 were clearly and precisely stating their
> preference for the UI cosmetics. Yet the polls for both 9.0 and 9.1
> were closed, even in the face of totally overwhelming and widespread
> public opinion FOR the old cosmetics/functionality.
If asked, people would all like to have tax cut. So, public opion is not
always good.
People who were asked are not the same that the one who discover a huge
and complicated program for the first time.
I don't use rpmdrake, but I feel it is clearer.
Now, if you want someting more feature full, I will package synaptics
once apt-get will compile on cooker.
Then, just vote for someone to backport it in 9.1.
> > Proposed implementations always sucked because they were based on
> > reverting to old rpmdrake with the clumsy complicated interface
> > with all features under the eyes, ending up with something too
> > complicated for beginners.
>
> The truth is that you have absolutely no idea WHAT beginners want
> simply because you have absolutely no discourse with them("it's
> marketing's job"), and what's more, you WANT NONE.
His job is not to talk with customer, it is to code. So, this is useless
to start a troll about his personal opinion.
And, if you think that a begginner want to have a full featured
interface, then I think you have a problem.
> If you have no
> discourse with the beginner, then whence do you get your information?
> ESP? God? A god complex?
For your information, mandrakesoft has a ergonomic team.
They are the people who decide the features to remove and to add.
You should ask to them why they did change.
And give them good argument, not a "it was better before", as we always
hear when anything change.
> The purpose of the voting forums is to get a quantifiable idea of
> what the paying members want, which is exactly what the Mandrake
> distro needs more than anything else right now.
As stated before, the voters are listened.
You should understand that even if you pay, this doesn't give you all
right on the design of rpmdrake.
Of course, I was happy too with the old rpmdrake.
But, I know that it is too complex for beginners.
So, as I said before, if you want something more feature full, ask for
synaptics.
Or give good reason.
--
Mickaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Please note, this is a development list, if you want a list for "Mandrakesoft business strategy", maybe you can find someone to host such as list, but this one is not for discussing Mandrakesoft business strategy, and I am quite sure no posts to this list by and Mandrakesoft employee should be taken as company policy ... Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 13:29, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Which is a moot point since if you are not going to pay any attention to > users that have *purchased* a vote, what then convinces anyone that you > will put a priority on users that HAVE NOT purchased a vote? Who you are > *not* listening to anyway any more than the paying ones? > > Basically your paragraph above is another way of saying that basically > the MandrakeClub users' opinions have no impact greater than the other > (non-paying) users, What about users who are not members, but contribute (not financially) to Mandrakesoft? Are MandrakeClub members the only people who pay (commercially)? > again about whose wishes you are as ignorant as the > Mandrakeclub user's wishes and polls, and thus further emphasizes what I > have been saying for some time now, which is that the money that Club > members pay puts absolutely NO priority on their voting input/opinions > and therefore can be equated to being the same thing as a propaganda > scam. Thanks and no thanks for the vindication. > Sorry, but the voting for RPMS for 9.1 did influence the packages that were put in the main distro and included in PowerPack (which does not inlcude all of contrib). Search the archives for that. >>I wasn't even aware of the results of the presence and results of >>those polls. I was only aware that people wanted that we rebuild >>8.2 version on more recent releases. > > > Let me get this straight. You are a Mandrakesoft developer and are > completely unaware of what the MandrakeClub user/members wishes are with > regard to the Mandrake Distribution, and some of it's interfaces which > you are responsible for developing. That's an unfounded statement, many users interact on this list and via bugzilla. > Further, as a developer and a > person responsible for key user interfaces you are completely unaware of > paying Mandrake club user/member vote polls that explain Mandrake club > user/member preferences regarding said key user interfaces, even though > you are a paid employee of Mandrakesoft, the same company that created > the Mandrakeclub and the Mandrakeclub polls. (???) > 1)As far as I can see, there has been no poll on "Do you prefer the UI from rpmdrake in 8.2 to the new version". Maybe you can show me, since I don't see it here: http://www.mandrakeclub.com/pollBooth.php 2)MandrakeClub should be responsible for ensuring that this input is communicated to the development team, who handle requests from other users also, many who contribute in various ways. The developers shouldn't necessarily be repsonsible for tracking everything that happens on MandrakeClub. 3)MandrakeClub's primary reason for existence is to give people who get their distro via alternate means (downloading etc) an easy way to give back, with the possibility of influencing the development, and for other possible added benefits, and is advertised only as such. > I'm just going to stop digging with this one shovel and let you do all > the work since you are digging your own hole now with three backhoes and > a bulldozer. Well, this list *is* for development, something you may not have noticed ... Regards, Buchan - -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+72OhrJK6UGDSBKcRAjZcAJ4yZ74+8deozFwqbabE8O9t/LQmGgCgg+eF 6sniL/tS1kruhQtL9pAnmdk= =f4jn -END PGP SIGNATURE- ** Please click on http://www.cae.co.za/disclaimer.htm to read our e-mail disclaimer or send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a copy. **
Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed* software
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > mandrakeclub (or do a telephone poll for registered users, but that will > > be more expensive). > > I don't like mandrakeclub much. why? This is ofcourse a bit oftopic. But club gives you an excellent few of the (paying) user experience of the distro. Mandrake lacks resources currently. I assume they also lack resources for doing market research of individual users. Being actively involved in the club, would tell you what users interest the most (it ofcourse also costs too much time for every cooker to do it, but it is in contrast to this list, feedback of non-tech users). Ok, above only explains 1 possible advantage of club, that ofcourse does not mean you have to like or dislike it. > > I see now. Ok. I think that the other proposal to display results > in installed packages if search in installable fails is a good > compromise. > > The problem is that startup time will increase, together with > memory footprint. Not talking about maintainance issue. What exactly is done at startup, why does it take so long? I wondered about this before. There was also a post about the slow search (to which didn't quite satisfactory answer IM0, why is kpackage quicker in searching than rpmdrake? Do you think it can be optimized?) > > But hey people want more and more features.. they do have a cost. > luckily, we do have More's law. > Proposed implementations always sucked because they were based on > reverting to old rpmdrake with the clumsy complicated interface > with all features under the eyes, ending up with something too > complicated for beginners. Yes, it should be done in a good way. But as I said, rpmdrake currently has a very good and easy to understand basis, so I am confident you can improve on it:) d. > >
