[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Am Mittwoch, 7. M?rz 2012, 15:29:45 schrieb Ian Clarke:
> > So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> > shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> > sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> > there is no content. A cool web-UI wont change those points, so from my
> > perspective, a different interface may be nice, but it wont solve the
> > bigger issues with freenet.
> 
> So again, you think that just because a new UI won't solve every problem
> with Freenet, then we shouldn't do it?  That's completely illogical.

If it creates more problems than it solves, it is a problem.

Not being able to use freenet without Javascript would be a problem. Dillo has 
no Javascript support. Neither have w3m, lynx, and a whole bunch of other low-
profile browsers. Mainly used by geeky people - who are a natural target 
audience for freenet.

I don?t mind a good Javascript UI. But Sone was actually the first really 
useful example for that which I ever saw. Yahoo is a really good counter-
example: they even reimplemented tabs in Javascript?

Javascript has to be complementary, though: The UI has to work without it. And 
it can. After all, a reload of a local page is blazingly fast (when there are 
no other bottlenecks).

Also there are many points on the UI side which could be improved that don?t 
need JS. Better download-queue, integrated WoT and Sone (well, that benefits 
from JS), and so on.

On the other hand, drag-and-drop uploading with image previews and all that is 
quite a usability booster. So I am not against JS (anymore). I am just against 
requiring it.

Best wishes,
Arne

-- 
Unpolitisch sein
hei?t politisch sein, 
ohne es zu merken. 
- Arne (http://draketo.de)


-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 316 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/30e9a66d/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Nicolas Hernandez]

Https can be forbidden in some countries. It is important to have the
possibility to disable it.
Le 9 mars 2012 22:45, "Ximin Luo"  a ?crit :

> +1
>
> On 09/03/12 21:37, Evan Daniel wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
> >  wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> >>- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> >>- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> >>- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
> >>
> >> Let me know if I broke something.
> >>
> >> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various
> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> >
> > Awesome, thanks!
> >
> > I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> > probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> > that's not likely to be an issue?
> >
> > Evan Daniel
> > ___
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl at freenetproject.org
> > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
>
> --
> GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
> https://github.com/infinity0
> https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
> https://launchpad.net/~infinity0
>
>
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/98f75890/attachment.html>

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Friday 09 Mar 2012 23:02:49 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 7. M?rz 2012, 22:14:39 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
> > So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> > shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> > sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> > there is no content.
> 
> I think it goes even deeper: The installer fails for many. 

Does it still? If so we need to determine why.

> Also Freetalk is not integrated with the other parts of freenet. There should 
> be attachment options, where the post is only sent once the file finished 
> uploading. And lots of other ?small? stuff on the UI side.

Agreed, as does p0s, but first it has to WORK.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/0b0be104/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Am Mittwoch, 7. M?rz 2012, 13:40:56 schrieb Ian Clarke:
> Yes, the vast number of people that refuse to use anything but Lynx?  There
> is RMS, who are the other ones?  So far as I know RMS doesn't use Freenet
> so we don't have to worry about him.

I regularly browse freenet with a raw text interface. ssh to my box and lynx 
or w3m-mode in emacs.

It?s much faster and much more convenient than starting a firefox on the 300 
Mhz machine I use as laptop.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
1w6 sie zu achten,
sie alle zu finden,
in Spiele zu leiten
und sacht zu verbinden.
? http://1w6.org

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 316 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/5ff7fee1/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Matthew Toseland]

On Friday 09 Mar 2012 21:37:12 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
>  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> >- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> >- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> >- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
> >
> > Let me know if I broke something.
> >
> > I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
> > websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> 
> Awesome, thanks!
> 
> I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> that's not likely to be an issue?

When we get slashdotted, our server load can be rather high. And this is a 
fairly low end VM we're running it off.
> 
> Evan Daniel
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/306b2d60/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Ximin Luo]

Do you have some examples?

On 09/03/12 22:25, Nicolas Hernandez wrote:
> Https can be forbidden in some countries. It is important to have the
> possibility to disable it.
> 
> Le 9 mars 2012 22:45, "Ximin Luo"  <mailto:infinity0 at gmx.com>> a ?crit :
> 
> +1
> 
> On 09/03/12 21:37, Evan Daniel wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
> > mailto:nextgens at 
> freenetproject.org>> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> >>- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> >>- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> >>- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
> >>
> >> Let me know if I broke something.
> >>
> >> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various
> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> >
> > Awesome, thanks!
> >
> > I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> > probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> > that's not likely to be an issue?
> >
> > Evan Daniel
> > ___
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl at freenetproject.org <mailto:Devl at freenetproject.org>
> > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> 
> 
> --
> GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
> https://github.com/infinity0
> https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
> https://launchpad.net/~infinity0
> 
> 
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org <mailto:Devl at freenetproject.org>
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl


-- 
GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0
https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
https://launchpad.net/~infinity0

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/477a1ec0/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Steve Dougherty]

Should we get rid of more of the steps in the first-run setup? Asking
about datastore size is a must, but perhaps we can get away with
something like what I2P does where it assumes a very low bandwidth limit
and encourages users to raise it afterwards. This could work well
alongside requiring a 5KiB/s minimum. I2P works very nicely with
something that would work without Javascript, but works much better
with: it shows for a given speed setting how much it will likely use per
month. That a way better way to deal with monthly bandwidth limits than
asking directly.

-operhiem1

On 03/09/2012 07:50 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Freitag, 9. M?rz 2012, 23:14:04 schrieb Matthew Toseland:
>> On Friday 09 Mar 2012 23:02:49 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, 7. M?rz 2012, 22:14:39 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
>>>> So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
>>>> shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
>>>> sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
>>>> there is no content.
>>>
>>> I think it goes even deeper: The installer fails for many.
>>
>> Does it still? If so we need to determine why.
> 
> Last week someone in IRC had problems again.
> 
> And I think the installer has to be as simple and straightforward as 
> possible. 
> What I saw in the chinese freenet installation youtube movie was much too 
> complex. 6 steps in the installer (or so) and then 4 configuration steps (do 
> we really need 2 steps with only 2 buttons on the site?).
> 
> And then there are firewall and port-forwarding issues.
> 
>>> Also Freetalk is not integrated with the other parts of freenet. There
>>> should be attachment options, where the post is only sent once the file
>>> finished uploading. And lots of other ?small? stuff on the UI side.
>>
>> Agreed, as does p0s, but first it has to WORK.
> 
> Jupp. Any plans about Sone?
> 
> Best wishes,
> Arne
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/e31fc6d6/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Ximin Luo]

+1

On 09/03/12 21:37, Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
>>- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
>>- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
>>- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
>>
>> Let me know if I broke something.
>>
>> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
>> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> 
> Awesome, thanks!
> 
> I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> that's not likely to be an issue?
> 
> Evan Daniel
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl


-- 
GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0
https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
https://launchpad.net/~infinity0

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/235ad73f/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Florent Daigniere]

Hi,

I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
- deployed a valid certificate on postfix

Let me know if I broke something.

I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various websites 
to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)

Florent

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Daxter]

On Mar 9, 2012, at 15:37, Evan Daniel  wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
>  
>> 
>> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
>> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> 
> I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> that's not likely to be an issue?
> 
> Evan Daniel

I'm all for HTTPS, but do we really want to outright *remove* functionality 
from the site? Sure, HTTP isn't secure and all "modern" web browsers support 
it. However, we would be making it harder for people to learn about Freenet and 
potentially try it out. 

In the end I think we should do what every major website does today: encrypt 
the important data and let the entire site be accessible securely, but don't 
force it onto people.

-Daxter

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Steve Dougherty]

Should we get rid of more of the steps in the first-run setup? Asking
about datastore size is a must, but perhaps we can get away with
something like what I2P does where it assumes a very low bandwidth limit
and encourages users to raise it afterwards. This could work well
alongside requiring a 5KiB/s minimum. I2P works very nicely with
something that would work without Javascript, but works much better
with: it shows for a given speed setting how much it will likely use per
month. That a way better way to deal with monthly bandwidth limits than
asking directly.

-operhiem1

On 03/09/2012 07:50 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Freitag, 9. März 2012, 23:14:04 schrieb Matthew Toseland:
>> On Friday 09 Mar 2012 23:02:49 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, 7. März 2012, 22:14:39 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
 So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
 shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
 sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
 there is no content.
>>>
>>> I think it goes even deeper: The installer fails for many.
>>
>> Does it still? If so we need to determine why.
> 
> Last week someone in IRC had problems again.
> 
> And I think the installer has to be as simple and straightforward as 
> possible. 
> What I saw in the chinese freenet installation youtube movie was much too 
> complex. 6 steps in the installer (or so) and then 4 configuration steps (do 
> we really need 2 steps with only 2 buttons on the site?).
> 
> And then there are firewall and port-forwarding issues.
> 
>>> Also Freetalk is not integrated with the other parts of freenet. There
>>> should be attachment options, where the post is only sent once the file
>>> finished uploading. And lots of other “small” stuff on the UI side.
>>
>> Agreed, as does p0s, but first it has to WORK.
> 
> Jupp. Any plans about Sone?
> 
> Best wishes,
> Arne
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl@freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 16:23:49 Nicolas Hernandez wrote:
> Hello Ian,
> 
> We are still looking for the best choice between running in jetty
> a. Accessibility for devs (nice eclipse plugin for example)

Important but not absolutely vital. E.g. a fair bit happens with the current UI 
in spite of it not being very dev friendly.

> b. Accessibility for user

Vitally important but has a lot of meanings. E.g. totally blind people may use 
text readers or audio readers with limited or no javascript; paranoid users may 
turn off javascript; some users would like to be able to build custom themes 
(but this isn't important). More generally, users want the UI to be obvious, 
logical, responsive and pretty, in more or less that order: If it's easy to 
find what you are trying to do, it's a better UI than if it looks great but is 
completely incomprehensible, so the key thing is actually the design *from a 
usability point of view* i.e. have people thought about how the user will 
actually use it? This is mostly independant of toolkit (e.g. too much text = 
confusion; too little text = confusion). On the other hand, responding quickly 
and obviously to what the user is doing can help a lot, and this does ideally 
need javascript. And a few parts of the UI are just vastly better with 
javascript - notably stuff to do with chat, compare gmail to phpbb (Freetalk is 
much more like phpbb).

Also, some stuff is clearly controller side - a classic Freenet bug, fixed 
recently, is that when you ask Freenet to load a plugin, the browser would go 
off into limbo for minutes or more, rather than immediately returning to the 
plugins page showing that it is trying to load the plugin.

The web-pushing branch originally included code to use javascript and 
long-polling to auto-update a lot of the UI. This was never put back because of 
the bugs in the GWT web-pushing code, but for some elements it is useful, e.g. 
alerts, status pages etc.

> c. Light weight

Important. We don't want to have to add 20MB to the 10MB download just for the 
UI framework.

> d. Performance

Very important IMHO.
> 
> In our side the priority are like that a>b>d>c (+eclipse plugin)
> Four some freenet devs it loks like c>d>a>b (+velocity for templating)

I guess I'd say B D C A for me?
> 
> Not so easy to make the good choice. We have three mains ideas
> A- using Apache Wickets http://wicket.apache.org/
> B- gwt
> C- struts+extjs
> *D-  freenet devs ideas*

I'm afraid I don't have detailed knowledge of frameworks ...
> 
> This frameworks have to;
> 1. be active and old enough
> 2. including web n.m fionctionnalities
> 3. replace the Toad controller :-)
> 4. using jetty
> 5. be fully toolled for Eclipse
6. Ideally it should be possible to fall back to non-javascript, without 
actually having two complete UIs except where it is absolutely vital (IMHO 
maintaining two separate UIs would result in one of them being unmaintained in 
the long run and cause problems, as well as causing more work when we change 
something).
7. Ideally it should be possible to implement live updating using long-polling 
or similar, like the web-pushing branch, and without using one connection per 
window/tab. This is not needed immediately but it should be possible. It's not 
vital though, as we can use the existing GWT code if necessary.
> 
> We hope to have freenet devs ideas on it before starting anything :-)
> 
> Rgds
> 
> - Nicolas Hernandez
> a-n - aleph-networks
> *associ?*
> http://www.aleph-networks.com
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/72a2cb4e/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 21:19:38 Nicolas Hernandez wrote:
> rendering:
> it is important to differentiate the Redenderer and the Controller.
> GWT can be used:
> -  as a Controler
> -  as Renderer

Please explain briefly controller vs renderer? Is this Model/View/Controller 
you are talking about, or something else?
> 
> as Renderer gwt can offer a
> - MinimalHtmlRenderer Interface for admin and simple actions
> - Web2Renderer
> - AndroidRender ?
> 
> In this case the interface templates could be in xml and i am not sure than
> using velocity is a good idea
> 
> the beast:
> if GWT is the BEAST, ... there is some patterns against this.
> 
> gentoo:
> i love gentoo ... sorry about the gwt epic fail. Scripting if for us the
> main goal. Packaging is really important for accesibility too, as lynx for
> some admin stuffs.
> 
> So, the controler ? the application server ?
> 
> Its really a pleasure to be there :-)
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/37054287/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 19:40:56 Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 17:18:54 Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > Unless those freenet devs are willing to build the GUI themselves, I
> > > recommend that you do not allow them to prevent you from proceeding.
> > >  Someone willing to make things happen should not be prevented from doing
> > > so by someone with an opinion, but who isn't willing to do the work.
> >
> > Even if it means breaking existing code for a large minority of users?
> > (The whole no-javascript lobby)?
> 
> Yes, the vast number of people that refuse to use anything but Lynx?  There
> is RMS, who are the other ones?  So far as I know RMS doesn't use Freenet
> so we don't have to worry about him.
> 
> But seriously, it would be insanity to hold up development of a decent user
> interface just because of the griping of a few people who, for no logical
> reason, refuse to enable JavaScript in their browsers.

Last time I asked, just about everyone actively using FMS who commented on the 
matter was of the view that for Freenet to *require* javascript would be 
utterly unacceptable.

Aggravating your core userbase is usually a bad strategy, even if you hope that 
you might gain casual users to replace them eventually. IMHO it is important - 
not necessarily of primary importance, but an important consideration - not to 
alienate what is at present, and probably in future, an important demographic - 
paranoid (justifiably or not) semi-techie users.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/25d66016/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 20:09:51 Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Thomas Sachau  wrote:
> 
> > One reason to not use pre-compiled stuff is, that you can patch or
> > adjust the code before you compile it. In addition, only those patches
> > have a chance to go upstream, probably noone will accept a patch against
> > the generated javascript code.
> 
> How likely is that in practice?  In the entire history of Freenet has any
> third party felt the need to patch it?  

There have been a number of patches. The max-peers patch for example is very 
popular. There were various others in the past.

> This seems like an extreme
> edge-case to me, and that it shouldn't dictate key architectural decisions.
> 
> 
> > Since it is Gentoo policy to give the user this choice and ability,
> > shipping the precompiled code is not really an option.
> 
> Then perhaps the real problem here is Gentoo's policy?  In any case, I
> don't think Gentoo's policy should tie our hands one way or another - our
> policy is that we need a decent user interface :-)

Gentoo's policy is exactly the same as Debian's policy AFAIK and there are good 
reasons for it. However, this does not prevent us providing our own packages. 
Having an official gentoo package is a debatable point, it certainly is of some 
value (it isn't possible for other distros and many people who may be 
interested in freenet do run gentoo), but it's not THAT many potential users.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/1be471f5/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 21:29:45 Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Thomas Sachau  wrote:
> 
> > Ian Clarke schrieb:
> > Do you really think, that having some nice javascript or otherwise
> > adjusted interface would magically raise the numbers of users?
> 
> I think having a nice, well defined user interface will raise the number of
> users, yes.  Javascript is just a means to this end, since it's well suited
> to rich web UIs, which Freenet requires.

Do you have an example in mind?
> 
> > Some eye-candy
> 
> I'm not talking about "eye-candy", I'm talking about good user interface
> design.

Javascript can be used for both eye-candy and good user interface design, but 
the latter doesn't require javascript.
> 
> > wont keep new users nor will it get you many new users,
> > it is way more important to have a reliable working freenet with some
> > nice additional apps (which themselves should also be reliable).
> > The only reliable working additional apps seem to be FMS and maybe Frost
> > (where the later has of course issues with spam). So due to the spam,
> > the only app left is in the end FMS. Now instead of supporting that,
> > something different is started and suggested (with wot and freetalk),
> > which still have many issues, are not reliable and where until now
> > nobody was able to even tell me, how wot itself works.

Ian is correct: We have a volunteer here interested in UIs, let's give them all 
the help we can.

However, I agree in part that functionality and performance are often more 
important than small improvements to the UI, which we have had third party 
reviews praising as at least somewhat usable. (See e.g. some press a while 
back).

WoT and Freetalk are not bundled, they are installed if you ask it to. We could 
have WoT auto-installed if we wanted to - it won't do anything if you don't 
create an identity, although the next step would be to create one optionally on 
setup. WoT is a lot more mature than Freetalk. On the other hand, architectural 
changes are still likely ...

A lot of people say Sone works. It's not even on the plugin list because:
1) nobody's read the code except Bombe and
2) it has severe scalability problems which AFAIK have still not been 
addressed, and which will probably result in major changes to functionality 
eventually IMHO.
> 
> > So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> > shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> > sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> > there is no content. A cool web-UI wont change those points, so from my
> > perspective, a different interface may be nice, but it wont solve the
> > bigger issues with freenet.

Content is a chicken and egg problem. But it's also a matter of making it 
really easy to upload content with better tools, and that includes better UIs. 
E.g. the blog wizard we have is rather geeky.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120309/274776c3/attachment.pgp>

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Daxter]

On Mar 9, 2012, at 15:37, Evan Daniel  wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
>  
>> 
>> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
>> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> 
> I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> that's not likely to be an issue?
> 
> Evan Daniel

I'm all for HTTPS, but do we really want to outright *remove* functionality 
from the site? Sure, HTTP isn't secure and all "modern" web browsers support 
it. However, we would be making it harder for people to learn about Freenet and 
potentially try it out. 

In the end I think we should do what every major website does today: encrypt 
the important data and let the entire site be accessible securely, but don't 
force it onto people.

-Daxter
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Am Freitag, 9. März 2012, 23:14:04 schrieb Matthew Toseland:
> On Friday 09 Mar 2012 23:02:49 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 7. März 2012, 22:14:39 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
> > > So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> > > shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> > > sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> > > there is no content.
> >
> > I think it goes even deeper: The installer fails for many.
>
> Does it still? If so we need to determine why.

Last week someone in IRC had problems again.

And I think the installer has to be as simple and straightforward as possible.
What I saw in the chinese freenet installation youtube movie was much too
complex. 6 steps in the installer (or so) and then 4 configuration steps (do
we really need 2 steps with only 2 buttons on the site?).

And then there are firewall and port-forwarding issues.

> > Also Freetalk is not integrated with the other parts of freenet. There
> > should be attachment options, where the post is only sent once the file
> > finished uploading. And lots of other “small” stuff on the UI side.
>
> Agreed, as does p0s, but first it has to WORK.

Jupp. Any plans about Sone?

Best wishes,
Arne

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Evan Daniel]

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> ? ? ? ?- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> ? ? ? ?- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> ? ? ? ?- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
>
> Let me know if I broke something.
>
> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)

Awesome, thanks!

I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
that's not likely to be an issue?

Evan Daniel

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Nicolas Hernandez]

Syria was
Le 9 mars 2012 23:55, "Ximin Luo"  a écrit :

> Do you have some examples?
>
> On 09/03/12 22:25, Nicolas Hernandez wrote:
> > Https can be forbidden in some countries. It is important to have the
> > possibility to disable it.
> >
> > Le 9 mars 2012 22:45, "Ximin Luo"  > > a écrit :
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On 09/03/12 21:37, Evan Daniel wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
> > > mailto:nextg...@freenetproject.org>>
> wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> > >>- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> > >>- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> > >>- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
> > >>
> > >> Let me know if I broke something.
> > >>
> > >> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the
> various
> > websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> > >
> > > Awesome, thanks!
> > >
> > > I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> > > probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> > > that's not likely to be an issue?
> > >
> > > Evan Daniel
> > > ___
> > > Devl mailing list
> > > Devl@freenetproject.org 
> > > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> >
> >
> > --
> > GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
> > https://github.com/infinity0
> > https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
> > https://launchpad.net/~infinity0
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl@freenetproject.org 
> > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl@freenetproject.org
> > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
>
> --
> GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
> https://github.com/infinity0
> https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
> https://launchpad.net/~infinity0
>
>
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl@freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Friday 09 Mar 2012 23:02:49 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 7. März 2012, 22:14:39 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
> > So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> > shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> > sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> > there is no content.
> 
> I think it goes even deeper: The installer fails for many. 

Does it still? If so we need to determine why.

> Also Freetalk is not integrated with the other parts of freenet. There should 
> be attachment options, where the post is only sent once the file finished 
> uploading. And lots of other “small” stuff on the UI side.

Agreed, as does p0s, but first it has to WORK.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Matthew Toseland]

On Friday 09 Mar 2012 21:37:12 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
>  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> >- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> >- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> >- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
> >
> > Let me know if I broke something.
> >
> > I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
> > websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> 
> Awesome, thanks!
> 
> I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> that's not likely to be an issue?

When we get slashdotted, our server load can be rather high. And this is a 
fairly low end VM we're running it off.
> 
> Evan Daniel


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Am Freitag, 9. März 2012, 23:25:17 schrieb Nicolas Hernandez:
> Https can be forbidden in some countries. It is important to have the
> possibility to disable it.

It could also be broken in some users systems. I had a few weeks last year in
which I could not access any https site (library broken, I guess it was a
power-failure on update).

Best wishes,
Arne

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Am Mittwoch, 7. März 2012, 22:14:39 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
> So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> there is no content.

I think it goes even deeper: The installer fails for many.
Also Freetalk is not integrated with the other parts of freenet. There should
be attachment options, where the post is only sent once the file finished
uploading. And lots of other “small” stuff on the UI side.

Essentially polish.

I think being really polished and getting rid of all the small rough edges
would be a much stronger usability boost than using new tech. (except if that
new tech does not add more rough corners and makes is much easier to fix
existing problems)

Best wishes,
Arne
--
1w6 sie zu achten,
sie alle zu finden,
in Spiele zu leiten
und sacht zu verbinden.
→ http://1w6.org



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Am Mittwoch, 7. März 2012, 15:29:45 schrieb Ian Clarke:
> > So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> > shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> > sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> > there is no content. A cool web-UI wont change those points, so from my
> > perspective, a different interface may be nice, but it wont solve the
> > bigger issues with freenet.
>
> So again, you think that just because a new UI won't solve every problem
> with Freenet, then we shouldn't do it?  That's completely illogical.

If it creates more problems than it solves, it is a problem.

Not being able to use freenet without Javascript would be a problem. Dillo has
no Javascript support. Neither have w3m, lynx, and a whole bunch of other low-
profile browsers. Mainly used by geeky people - who are a natural target
audience for freenet.

I don’t mind a good Javascript UI. But Sone was actually the first really
useful example for that which I ever saw. Yahoo is a really good counter-
example: they even reimplemented tabs in Javascript…

Javascript has to be complementary, though: The UI has to work without it. And
it can. After all, a reload of a local page is blazingly fast (when there are
no other bottlenecks).

Also there are many points on the UI side which could be improved that don’t
need JS. Better download-queue, integrated WoT and Sone (well, that benefits
from JS), and so on.

On the other hand, drag-and-drop uploading with image previews and all that is
quite a usability booster. So I am not against JS (anymore). I am just against
requiring it.

Best wishes,
Arne

--
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
- Arne (http://draketo.de)




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Ximin Luo]

Do you have some examples?

On 09/03/12 22:25, Nicolas Hernandez wrote:
> Https can be forbidden in some countries. It is important to have the
> possibility to disable it.
> 
> Le 9 mars 2012 22:45, "Ximin Luo"  > a écrit :
> 
> +1
> 
> On 09/03/12 21:37, Evan Daniel wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
> > mailto:nextg...@freenetproject.org>> 
> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> >>- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> >>- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> >>- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
> >>
> >> Let me know if I broke something.
> >>
> >> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various
> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> >
> > Awesome, thanks!
> >
> > I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> > probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> > that's not likely to be an issue?
> >
> > Evan Daniel
> > ___
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl@freenetproject.org 
> > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> 
> 
> --
> GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
> https://github.com/infinity0
> https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
> https://launchpad.net/~infinity0
> 
> 
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl@freenetproject.org 
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl@freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl


-- 
GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0
https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
https://launchpad.net/~infinity0



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Nicolas Hernandez]

Https can be forbidden in some countries. It is important to have the
possibility to disable it.
Le 9 mars 2012 22:45, "Ximin Luo"  a écrit :

> +1
>
> On 09/03/12 21:37, Evan Daniel wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
> >  wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
> >>- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
> >>- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
> >>- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
> >>
> >> Let me know if I broke something.
> >>
> >> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various
> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> >
> > Awesome, thanks!
> >
> > I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> > probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> > that's not likely to be an issue?
> >
> > Evan Daniel
> > ___
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl@freenetproject.org
> > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
>
> --
> GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
> https://github.com/infinity0
> https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
> https://launchpad.net/~infinity0
>
>
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl@freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Am Mittwoch, 7. März 2012, 13:40:56 schrieb Ian Clarke:
> Yes, the vast number of people that refuse to use anything but Lynx?  There
> is RMS, who are the other ones?  So far as I know RMS doesn't use Freenet
> so we don't have to worry about him.

I regularly browse freenet with a raw text interface. ssh to my box and lynx
or w3m-mode in emacs.

It’s much faster and much more convenient than starting a firefox on the 300
Mhz machine I use as laptop.

Best wishes,
Arne
--
1w6 sie zu achten,
sie alle zu finden,
in Spiele zu leiten
und sacht zu verbinden.
→ http://1w6.org



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Ximin Luo]

+1

On 09/03/12 21:37, Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
>>- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
>>- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
>>- deployed a valid certificate on postfix
>>
>> Let me know if I broke something.
>>
>> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
>> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)
> 
> Awesome, thanks!
> 
> I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
> probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
> that's not likely to be an issue?
> 
> Evan Daniel
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl@freenetproject.org
> http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl


-- 
GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE
https://github.com/infinity0
https://bitbucket.org/infinity0
https://launchpad.net/~infinity0



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Evan Daniel]

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florent Daigniere
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
>        - re-enabled ipv6 on all services
>        - updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
>        - deployed a valid certificate on postfix
>
> Let me know if I broke something.
>
> I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various 
> websites to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)

Awesome, thanks!

I'm in favor of https only. The only real arguments against it are
probably server cpu load. I assume that given our traffic levels,
that's not likely to be an issue?

Evan Daniel
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

[freenet-dev] Should we switch the websites to httpS only?

[Florent Daigniere]

Hi,

I've been doing some sysadmin tonight:
- re-enabled ipv6 on all services
- updated the DNS records (SPF, ...)
- deployed a valid certificate on postfix

Let me know if I broke something.

I was wondering, do we have any good reason not to switch the various websites 
to HTTPS only? (with a 301 redirect on HTTP)

Florent
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 16:23:49 Nicolas Hernandez wrote:
> Hello Ian,
> 
> We are still looking for the best choice between running in jetty
> a. Accessibility for devs (nice eclipse plugin for example)

Important but not absolutely vital. E.g. a fair bit happens with the current UI 
in spite of it not being very dev friendly.

> b. Accessibility for user

Vitally important but has a lot of meanings. E.g. totally blind people may use 
text readers or audio readers with limited or no javascript; paranoid users may 
turn off javascript; some users would like to be able to build custom themes 
(but this isn't important). More generally, users want the UI to be obvious, 
logical, responsive and pretty, in more or less that order: If it's easy to 
find what you are trying to do, it's a better UI than if it looks great but is 
completely incomprehensible, so the key thing is actually the design *from a 
usability point of view* i.e. have people thought about how the user will 
actually use it? This is mostly independant of toolkit (e.g. too much text = 
confusion; too little text = confusion). On the other hand, responding quickly 
and obviously to what the user is doing can help a lot, and this does ideally 
need javascript. And a few parts of the UI are just vastly better with 
javascript - notably stuff to do with chat, compare gmail to phpbb (Freetalk is 
much more like phpbb).

Also, some stuff is clearly controller side - a classic Freenet bug, fixed 
recently, is that when you ask Freenet to load a plugin, the browser would go 
off into limbo for minutes or more, rather than immediately returning to the 
plugins page showing that it is trying to load the plugin.

The web-pushing branch originally included code to use javascript and 
long-polling to auto-update a lot of the UI. This was never put back because of 
the bugs in the GWT web-pushing code, but for some elements it is useful, e.g. 
alerts, status pages etc.

> c. Light weight

Important. We don't want to have to add 20MB to the 10MB download just for the 
UI framework.

> d. Performance

Very important IMHO.
> 
> In our side the priority are like that a>b>d>c (+eclipse plugin)
> Four some freenet devs it loks like c>d>a>b (+velocity for templating)

I guess I'd say B D C A for me?
> 
> Not so easy to make the good choice. We have three mains ideas
> A- using Apache Wickets http://wicket.apache.org/
> B- gwt
> C- struts+extjs
> *D-  freenet devs ideas*

I'm afraid I don't have detailed knowledge of frameworks ...
> 
> This frameworks have to;
> 1. be active and old enough
> 2. including web n.m fionctionnalities
> 3. replace the Toad controller :-)
> 4. using jetty
> 5. be fully toolled for Eclipse
6. Ideally it should be possible to fall back to non-javascript, without 
actually having two complete UIs except where it is absolutely vital (IMHO 
maintaining two separate UIs would result in one of them being unmaintained in 
the long run and cause problems, as well as causing more work when we change 
something).
7. Ideally it should be possible to implement live updating using long-polling 
or similar, like the web-pushing branch, and without using one connection per 
window/tab. This is not needed immediately but it should be possible. It's not 
vital though, as we can use the existing GWT code if necessary.
> 
> We hope to have freenet devs ideas on it before starting anything :-)
> 
> Rgds
> 
> - Nicolas Hernandez
> a-n - aleph-networks
> *associé*
> http://www.aleph-networks.com


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 21:19:38 Nicolas Hernandez wrote:
> rendering:
> it is important to differentiate the Redenderer and the Controller.
> GWT can be used:
> -  as a Controler
> -  as Renderer

Please explain briefly controller vs renderer? Is this Model/View/Controller 
you are talking about, or something else?
> 
> as Renderer gwt can offer a
> - MinimalHtmlRenderer Interface for admin and simple actions
> - Web2Renderer
> - AndroidRender ?
> 
> In this case the interface templates could be in xml and i am not sure than
> using velocity is a good idea
> 
> the beast:
> if GWT is the BEAST, ... there is some patterns against this.
> 
> gentoo:
> i love gentoo ... sorry about the gwt epic fail. Scripting if for us the
> main goal. Packaging is really important for accesibility too, as lynx for
> some admin stuffs.
> 
> So, the controler ? the application server ?
> 
> Its really a pleasure to be there :-)


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 19:40:56 Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 17:18:54 Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > Unless those freenet devs are willing to build the GUI themselves, I
> > > recommend that you do not allow them to prevent you from proceeding.
> > >  Someone willing to make things happen should not be prevented from doing
> > > so by someone with an opinion, but who isn't willing to do the work.
> >
> > Even if it means breaking existing code for a large minority of users?
> > (The whole no-javascript lobby)?
> 
> Yes, the vast number of people that refuse to use anything but Lynx?  There
> is RMS, who are the other ones?  So far as I know RMS doesn't use Freenet
> so we don't have to worry about him.
> 
> But seriously, it would be insanity to hold up development of a decent user
> interface just because of the griping of a few people who, for no logical
> reason, refuse to enable JavaScript in their browsers.

Last time I asked, just about everyone actively using FMS who commented on the 
matter was of the view that for Freenet to *require* javascript would be 
utterly unacceptable.

Aggravating your core userbase is usually a bad strategy, even if you hope that 
you might gain casual users to replace them eventually. IMHO it is important - 
not necessarily of primary importance, but an important consideration - not to 
alienate what is at present, and probably in future, an important demographic - 
paranoid (justifiably or not) semi-techie users.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 20:09:51 Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Thomas Sachau  wrote:
> 
> > One reason to not use pre-compiled stuff is, that you can patch or
> > adjust the code before you compile it. In addition, only those patches
> > have a chance to go upstream, probably noone will accept a patch against
> > the generated javascript code.
> 
> How likely is that in practice?  In the entire history of Freenet has any
> third party felt the need to patch it?  

There have been a number of patches. The max-peers patch for example is very 
popular. There were various others in the past.

> This seems like an extreme
> edge-case to me, and that it shouldn't dictate key architectural decisions.
> 
> 
> > Since it is Gentoo policy to give the user this choice and ability,
> > shipping the precompiled code is not really an option.
> 
> Then perhaps the real problem here is Gentoo's policy?  In any case, I
> don't think Gentoo's policy should tie our hands one way or another - our
> policy is that we need a decent user interface :-)

Gentoo's policy is exactly the same as Debian's policy AFAIK and there are good 
reasons for it. However, this does not prevent us providing our own packages. 
Having an official gentoo package is a debatable point, it certainly is of some 
value (it isn't possible for other distros and many people who may be 
interested in freenet do run gentoo), but it's not THAT many potential users.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] webui and accessibility

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 07 Mar 2012 21:29:45 Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Thomas Sachau  wrote:
> 
> > Ian Clarke schrieb:
> > Do you really think, that having some nice javascript or otherwise
> > adjusted interface would magically raise the numbers of users?
> 
> I think having a nice, well defined user interface will raise the number of
> users, yes.  Javascript is just a means to this end, since it's well suited
> to rich web UIs, which Freenet requires.

Do you have an example in mind?
> 
> > Some eye-candy
> 
> I'm not talking about "eye-candy", I'm talking about good user interface
> design.

Javascript can be used for both eye-candy and good user interface design, but 
the latter doesn't require javascript.
> 
> > wont keep new users nor will it get you many new users,
> > it is way more important to have a reliable working freenet with some
> > nice additional apps (which themselves should also be reliable).
> > The only reliable working additional apps seem to be FMS and maybe Frost
> > (where the later has of course issues with spam). So due to the spam,
> > the only app left is in the end FMS. Now instead of supporting that,
> > something different is started and suggested (with wot and freetalk),
> > which still have many issues, are not reliable and where until now
> > nobody was able to even tell me, how wot itself works.

Ian is correct: We have a volunteer here interested in UIs, let's give them all 
the help we can.

However, I agree in part that functionality and performance are often more 
important than small improvements to the UI, which we have had third party 
reviews praising as at least somewhat usable. (See e.g. some press a while 
back).

WoT and Freetalk are not bundled, they are installed if you ask it to. We could 
have WoT auto-installed if we wanted to - it won't do anything if you don't 
create an identity, although the next step would be to create one optionally on 
setup. WoT is a lot more mature than Freetalk. On the other hand, architectural 
changes are still likely ...

A lot of people say Sone works. It's not even on the plugin list because:
1) nobody's read the code except Bombe and
2) it has severe scalability problems which AFAIK have still not been 
addressed, and which will probably result in major changes to functionality 
eventually IMHO.
> 
> > So what is the experience of new users? Install freenet, see automaticly
> > shipped wot+freetalk, try them, see their issues, maybe browse some
> > sites and uninstall freenet again, since things either do rarely work or
> > there is no content. A cool web-UI wont change those points, so from my
> > perspective, a different interface may be nice, but it wont solve the
> > bigger issues with freenet.

Content is a chicken and egg problem. But it's also a matter of making it 
really easy to upload content with better tools, and that includes better UIs. 
E.g. the blog wizard we have is rather geeky.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl