Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Andrew Sayers ha scritto: >> What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there >> is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? > > Since we're talking about regressions here, one solution would be to > make downgrading as easy as upgrading, and to request an optional > hardware profile immediately before a user up/downgrades. That you can't do for your life: in feisty, my hardware works (well, don't know about the webcam, actually). But at office, I have hardy, and I use lyx from there. The version of lyx in feisty will not read the files I produce at office. Indeed, there are plenty of bugfixes which are not regressions, and I couldn't stick with feisty forever. What I can do, is to install feisty and use it when I really need it. But for a network card it isn't that simple as you can imagine. The point raised by Sarah, how do you organise such a database and how can you be "boolean" in saying that something does not work, is an extremely good question. I need to think about it and see if I can suggest a solution or not. A "quantitative" yet simple answer is that by looking at launchpad I can immediately tell that "iwl3945 drivers suck" :) But this does not solve the problem of creating a good hardware support database, which seems to be quantitative rather than boolean in many cases. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Scott Kitterman ha scritto: > On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I >> just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. > > I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in > Hardy. I have't had a need for WEP since I upgraded to Intrepid. > > As an aside, if people are truly concerned about privacy/security, they > should be on WPA. WEP is trivial to break. > > Scott K > Scott, if you move often you get what they give you, in my case it is a stupid unprotected network... but the laptop has to work. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thursday 13 November 2008 22:43, Mackenzie Morgan wrote: > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:12 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > >I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I > > >just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. > > > > I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in > > Hardy. I have't had a need for WEP since I upgraded to Intrepid. > > > > As an aside, if people are truly concerned about privacy/security, they > > should be on WPA. WEP is trivial to break. > > I know that, but until about two months ago, the network in the computer > science department at school (yeah, go figure) was WEP, so it was a sort > of "not-by-choice" thing for me. And visiting other people's houses, > WEP is often something you need to deal with. Right. It's not always a choice. I didn't mean to imply it didn't matter if WEP worked because people shouldn't use it. It ought to work. I know my 4965 laptop worked with WEP in Hardy because I was working on site at a customer for a while and the employee wireless network was WPA and the visitor's network was WEP. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:12 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I > >just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. > > I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in > Hardy. I have't had a need for WEP since I upgraded to Intrepid. > > As an aside, if people are truly concerned about privacy/security, they > should be on WPA. WEP is trivial to break. I know that, but until about two months ago, the network in the computer science department at school (yeah, go figure) was WEP, so it was a sort of "not-by-choice" thing for me. And visiting other people's houses, WEP is often something you need to deal with. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I >just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in Hardy. I have't had a need for WEP since I upgraded to Intrepid. As an aside, if people are truly concerned about privacy/security, they should be on WPA. WEP is trivial to break. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:58 +0100, Nicolas Deschildre wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: > >> Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work > >> for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also > >> mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. > >> > >> However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of > >> the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works > >> for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to > >> gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, > >> which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without > >> problems. > > > > In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the > > issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use > > NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use > > network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't > > get an IP address. > > And yet, my intel 3945 works fine with me with WEP & NetworkManager > both in Hardy and Intrepid. Don't forget there are multiple > "sub-models" of a given model. > Please report your detailled hardware information (lspci -vvnn) on > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/253697 (Intel > 3945 Wireless in Hardy cannot negotiate WEP or WPA Keys) or/and > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/223174 (Intel > WLAN, 3945 (a/b/g) - low performance). Ah, looking again, I'm subscribed to the first, but it's not what I'm describing. That one is that both WEP and WPA fail. In my case, it just fails with NetworkManager with WEP. WPA is fine. There's a bug sitting around for that too, though. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22/+bug/139080 It's filed in Feisty and Gutsy, but it still exists with Hardy and iwl3945. With that laptop, WEP went like this: Dapper + ipw3945 + network-admin = works Feisty, Gutsy + ipw3945 + NM = fail...WEP key not accepted Hardy + iwl3945 + NM = fail...WEP key not accepted Hardy + iwl3945 + network-admin = fail...WEP key accepted, no ip address Hardy + iwl3945 + iwconfig + dhclient = works I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:58 +0100, Nicolas Deschildre wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: > >> Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work > >> for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also > >> mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. > >> > >> However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of > >> the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works > >> for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to > >> gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, > >> which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without > >> problems. > > > > In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the > > issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use > > NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use > > network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't > > get an IP address. > > And yet, my intel 3945 works fine with me with WEP & NetworkManager > both in Hardy and Intrepid. Don't forget there are multiple > "sub-models" of a given model. > Please report your detailled hardware information (lspci -vvnn) on > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/253697 (Intel > 3945 Wireless in Hardy cannot negotiate WEP or WPA Keys) or/and > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/223174 (Intel > WLAN, 3945 (a/b/g) - low performance). I think I'm already on the first bug, but I'll check again. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: >> Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work >> for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also >> mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. >> >> However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of >> the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works >> for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to >> gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, >> which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without problems. > > In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the > issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use > NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use > network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't > get an IP address. And yet, my intel 3945 works fine with me with WEP & NetworkManager both in Hardy and Intrepid. Don't forget there are multiple "sub-models" of a given model. Please report your detailled hardware information (lspci -vvnn) on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/253697 (Intel 3945 Wireless in Hardy cannot negotiate WEP or WPA Keys) or/and https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/223174 (Intel WLAN, 3945 (a/b/g) - low performance). -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
RE: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: > Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work > for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also > mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. > > However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of > the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works > for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to > gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, > which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without problems. In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't get an IP address. And yes, you're of course right about the issues with not having access to the hardware to fix it. I've overheard someone mutter "well if you'd send me some hardware, sure I could make it work..." I recall that the day I met Daniel Chen, he was showing up to an installfest so he could fix any sound bugs with actual, physical access to the hardware. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thursday 13 November 2008 05:13, Andrew Sayers wrote: > Sarah - this should make sense on its own, but it builds on an idea I > suggested in > https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2008-November/006250 >.html > > which you might provide a little background to this post. > > > 3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected > > and I feel like these should be a bit more acknowledged by developers. > > Because I can't be the only one." > > > > What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there > > is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? > > Since we're talking about regressions here, one solution would be to > make downgrading as easy as upgrading, and to request an optional > hardware profile immediately before a user up/downgrades. Spotting > problematic hardware then becomes a relatively simple statistical > problem: when a user gives their hardware profile ready for an upgrade, > they can be informed "you have , users with were n% > more likely than average to downgrade. Are you sure you want to > continue?". > Downgrading an entire system is never going to be reliable. It might be possible to take a snapshot of the system onto a suitable storage medium that one could restore to if needed. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
2008/11/13 Andrew Sayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Stephan Hermann wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 11:56 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote: > >> > >> - Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of > >> the trouble. > > > > This is something I don't understand. > > When I upgrade to a new release, I always think (or is it knowing): "Ok, > > for the next 4 hours I'll sit in front of this computer, and I expect > > something to break...because it's software made by people". If nothing > > breaks, then I'm really surprised and happy. But when something breaks, > > I already expected that. And when I find the cause for the breakage, > > I'll try to fix it, AND/OR file a bug report about that issue. > > That's commendable practice, but the problem in Vincenzo's case was a > hardware regression that would require upstream developer time in order > to write a fix. An easy downgrade path would give users in that > situation the opportunity to use a system that works while they're > waiting. It also gives a communication channel to users that aren't > technical enough to describe hardware problems - if we log hardware > profiles when users up/downgrade, we can see which profiles correlate > most strongly with downgrades, and use that to help guess which bug > reports are one guy with a dodgy graphics card, and which are something > more general. > >- Andrew > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > Surely trying to make a safe downgrade path risks introducing even more regressions on top of the original ones, and could be a significant amount of effort - effort that is better spent on fixing the original regressions. Creating a downgrade path seems like a lot of work for very little gain IMO. Regards Chris -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Stephan Hermann wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 11:56 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote: >> >> - Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of >> the trouble. > > This is something I don't understand. > When I upgrade to a new release, I always think (or is it knowing): "Ok, > for the next 4 hours I'll sit in front of this computer, and I expect > something to break...because it's software made by people". If nothing > breaks, then I'm really surprised and happy. But when something breaks, > I already expected that. And when I find the cause for the breakage, > I'll try to fix it, AND/OR file a bug report about that issue. That's commendable practice, but the problem in Vincenzo's case was a hardware regression that would require upstream developer time in order to write a fix. An easy downgrade path would give users in that situation the opportunity to use a system that works while they're waiting. It also gives a communication channel to users that aren't technical enough to describe hardware problems - if we log hardware profiles when users up/downgrade, we can see which profiles correlate most strongly with downgrades, and use that to help guess which bug reports are one guy with a dodgy graphics card, and which are something more general. - Andrew -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
> Canonical does provide Support for Ubuntu for You, when you want to > pay > it. If not, fix it yourself, or help us fixing it e.g. join the irc > and > point people to it. If people can't help you directly, because of not > having the broken hardware, you can try to provide this hardware to > the > people (that's an example, and hey, this you can't do when you use MS > Windows). Nailed it. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Hi Markus, On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 11:56 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote: > Am 13.11.2008 um 10:32 schrieb Stephan Hermann: > > > But reality told me different. > > Stephan, your points about the unfortunate truth are valid. Sad, but true. > Nevertheless, software quality is one of the keys to success. > I've just filed the second bug where one of the Gnome applets > segfaults in a standard situation. Many developers obviously code > really sloppy, a la "it worked once in my situation, so it works > always in all situations". Some developers even consider a segfault > as a normal way to end the execution of an application. This is a > more general observation of mine, this is ridiculous. > > While we can't "fix" developers, we can put more automatic helpers > into place: > > - Keep Apport enabled even on stable releases. Hiding bugs doesn't > help. > > While this doesn't fix bugs by it's self, it greatly helps to fix > them after the fact (and timely educate developers about their > practices). Yes...this can help us, to shape applications which are running actually on the user's desktops, but doesn't prevent it from happening. If the bug is found after a release, it's already too late. Well, not too late to fix it in an upcoming release, but too late today. But here is a point: Why did the bug occur after the release first, or when it occurred during development, why nobody took care to fix it? And here are some answers (hopefully not all, but some, and mostly not correct): 1. The bug occurred after the release: a) The application in question is not used by a wide range of users. If it would have been used by a broader community, the bug would have occurred during development b) Nobody, using this software before release, was actually able to file a bug report to the distro bug tracker. That's not good. And this starts another flow of questions, but those I won't raise here. 2. The bug occurred during development, why wasn't it fixed by someone? a) There was no bug report, look at 1.b) b) Most likely the application package waits in the Universe/Multiverse pocket, and no non-paid/paid dev took care, because it's not important for the release goal and nobody was interested, because it's unsupported. c) The application is in one of the supported pockets (main/restricted), the core devs had it on the radar, but decided to take it as a regression which could be fixed later, and is not so important for the release in general. d) the bug is so difficult and non-trivial to reproduce, or to fix, and the bug was pushed upstream, and the distro team just have to wait for a fix or an answer. This is belongs to the application level so far. Coming to the more delicate kernel level: > > Additionally, this opens the door to get some automatic measure about > the quality of drivers or other software. Count open bugs and you > know what you roughly can expect. If you count too many of them, drop > the hardware in the compatibility list. As said in one of my mails: The problem here is, that some users with the hardware on a list don't have problems, but others have. Now, how can we determine what the difference between the hardware is, between those with and those without problems? This task is not easy. There needs to be input from the users with the non-working hardware. Most likely, that this information can be gathered with some magic commands on CLI, which is also provided by a nice developer. But user thinks: "Damn, this takes more time, more that I want to invest in this...this OS is crap...the devs are lazy bastards, because the hardware is on the list...but as I can see, it doesn't work, wait I'll tell them that on the ML or whereever". So, for the kernel devs or other devs in other parts of the distro, it's quite difficult sometimes to get the necessary infos, when people are not coming back and providing the infos about the hardware, or if they did, then they won't come back to test the fix, because they already installed another OS or switched back to something else. There are so many variables, which are playing a part, starting from non-working hardware revision to the decision: "Ok, this card is only 10 days old, most likely that there are not many people who are using it, we need to forget about this, during this release cycle, and yes, we screw the people who have this card, but the majority is not affected at all." to "Shit, we didn't even know that this wasn't working, yeah there was a report, but we didn't get the infos back we needed to investigate..shit happens, but shit happens all the time, let's document it". And in reality, only one or two newer revisions of chipset are not working anymore...but to get this revision it takes time to get the right info from the users. > > To keep more users happy: > > - Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of > the trouble. This is something I don't understand. When I upgrade to a new
Hardware regressions was (Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions))
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:00:36 + Vincenzo Ciancia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but >> that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts >> the hardware on the list of supported hardware. >> > >I hope this is not really the idea of the ubuntu developers on this >topic, because if so, then I can really, really forget all my bugs, and >go home happy. If the idea is that a trial-and-error process should be >the normal way of using ubuntu (it is the way I use it every time I >install it to other people), then just tell me. I think it's >unbelievable how far things went in this direction. If this is >considered normal and unharmful, there's clearly something that I didn't >understand here. Part of what goes on is that the details of a product change over time, where a specific part was made, or any number of things. So when one person says (to pick one example, this is true for all vendors) IW 3945 is broken and another says it's not, they probably don't have identical cards. We also have more than one kernel. Maybe it works with i386, but is broken with amd64. Use cases differ too. I have a laptop with IW 4965 and it works great for me. A lot of people reported problems on Intrepid with this card. As it happens, I am mostly (maybe always) on 802.11G networks. People with the problems have 802.11N (mostly anyway - see the other factors). Part of the trouble with a hardware database is what to put in it to make it reliable, yet searchable. So this is not an easy problem. Back in Edgy I remember spending a lot of time digging through wiki pages trying to figure out wifi. Clearly we need to do better with this, but I'm not sure exactly how. I think this may be a topic to take up with the QA team. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Am 13.11.2008 um 10:32 schrieb Stephan Hermann: > But reality told me different. Stephan, your points about the unfortunate truth are valid. Nevertheless, software quality is one of the keys to success. I've just filed the second bug where one of the Gnome applets segfaults in a standard situation. Many developers obviously code really sloppy, a la "it worked once in my situation, so it works always in all situations". Some developers even consider a segfault as a normal way to end the execution of an application. This is a more general observation of mine, this is ridiculous. While we can't "fix" developers, we can put more automatic helpers into place: - Keep Apport enabled even on stable releases. Hiding bugs doesn't help. While this doesn't fix bugs by it's self, it greatly helps to fix them after the fact (and timely educate developers about their practices). Additionally, this opens the door to get some automatic measure about the quality of drivers or other software. Count open bugs and you know what you roughly can expect. If you count too many of them, drop the hardware in the compatibility list. To keep more users happy: - Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of the trouble. Ideally, there would be a big regression testing facility, like Wine has one. Each time a Wine developer fixes a bug, he's pushed to create a test for his case. These test cases are run automatically for each commited patch and pretty well avoid introducing a bug a second time. to add my $o.o2, MarKus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Sarah - this should make sense on its own, but it builds on an idea I suggested in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2008-November/006250.html which you might provide a little background to this post. > 3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected > and I feel like these should be a bit more acknowledged by developers. > Because I can't be the only one." > > What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there > is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? Since we're talking about regressions here, one solution would be to make downgrading as easy as upgrading, and to request an optional hardware profile immediately before a user up/downgrades. Spotting problematic hardware then becomes a relatively simple statistical problem: when a user gives their hardware profile ready for an upgrade, they can be informed "you have , users with were n% more likely than average to downgrade. Are you sure you want to continue?". - Andrew -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
RE: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Apologies for breaking threading, i'm not subscribed to this list anymore, as the S/N ratio was too low. However, this part is interesting. Please CC me on any responses to this mail. Vincenzo writes: "2) Another bug affected me at random (WIFI), and there was nothing I could do about that, and it happened to me other times with other intel cards. I've not been clear perhaps, but the problem is that I was used to have my network card functioning, and one day it just left me without connection - after I moved abroad for one month, not after I upgraded. This is because intel's drivers mostly suck, there is no simpler explanation. They have tons of bugs and corner cases (I can support this by pointing at the number and gravity of LP bugs for them). I want to be able to rely and let others rely on ubuntu so we need to know what works and what not. 3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected and I feel like these should be a bit more acknowledged by developers. Because I can't be the only one." What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without problems. The bugs that affect everyone with a particular chipset are often acknowledged, particularly in the release notes. Maybe it would be nice to acknowledge that some people have problems with this card- but that's only some people. You'd be telling a whole lot of other people that their cards may not work, when they actually work just fine. Also, I'd be willing to bet that at least one person has a problems with *every* card in Ubuntu. Does it really make sense to acknowledge them all? How does one generalise that, in a paragraph or two, and it still be useful? Arguably, it would help if the relevant (i presume kernel) developers had access to some of these faulting cards - the ones that do break where people can reproduce it on site seem to get fixed quite quickly. But it's very hard to debug something where you don't have access (and it's quite hard to buy hardware to try to fix it, if only a smallish percentage of cards actually exhibit this buggy behaviour!) Thoughts? Just my 2c. Hobbsee signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Hi, On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 09:00 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: > > If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but > > that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts > > the hardware on the list of supported hardware. > > > > I hope this is not really the idea of the ubuntu developers on this > topic, because if so, then I can really, really forget all my bugs, and > go home happy. If the idea is that a trial-and-error process should be > the normal way of using ubuntu (it is the way I use it every time I > install it to other people), then just tell me. I think it's > unbelievable how far things went in this direction. If this is > considered normal and unharmful, there's clearly something that I didn't > understand here. This is reality :) Really. Example: I bought an USB DTV Stick for terrestrial signals. The product I bought is supported regarding all sources I read (linuxdvb, kernel...) So, I bought my hardware, regarding all infos I had access to. What was the result? In Hardy, this stick didn't work, just because the hardware vendor changed one single chip revision. And what now? Regarding the Ubuntu Kernel + all other infos, I bought a product, which just had to work out of the box. But reality told me different. Good, that upstream (those guys from linuxdvb) heard about this issue, and some guy also had this stick at home and they produced a new driver release, but this wasn't in time for Hardy. So, even if you buy hardware which should be supported by any linux distro out there, because someone put it on a list, you can't be sure, that it's actually working. Noone can and will add all different revisions of hardware chip infos on a list. What you mostly get is: ATI Graphics Card -> supported NVidia Graphics Card -> Supported USB DTV Stick Made FooBar -> Supported And then you will realize, that your very old card is not really supported anymore, even if it's an ATI or Nvidia...You will even realize that the new NVidia GeForce 10 with 8TB of RAM won't be supported, because the drivers were not finished in time... And this is nothing which only happens on Ubuntu...this happens all the time with any other distro, too. Most likely, if you use server hardware, which doesn't change so many times over three years than desktop hardware, you will be more happy. That's why most distros are not supporting a desktop version of their enterprise release. Because Desktops are really a pain for users and devs regarding hardware support. Regards, \sh -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
> If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but > that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts > the hardware on the list of supported hardware. > I hope this is not really the idea of the ubuntu developers on this topic, because if so, then I can really, really forget all my bugs, and go home happy. If the idea is that a trial-and-error process should be the normal way of using ubuntu (it is the way I use it every time I install it to other people), then just tell me. I think it's unbelievable how far things went in this direction. If this is considered normal and unharmful, there's clearly something that I didn't understand here. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Moins, On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 02:27 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: > On 11/11/2008 Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > > I would encourage you (and others, you certainly aren't the only one) > > to hold > > your temper and if you can't say something helpful, just take your > > hands off > > the keyboard. Being angry, contemptuous, and disrespectful won't get > > your > > bugs fixed faster. What it will get you is yet another list with no > > developers on it and you upset you can't get in touch with them. > > > You are perfectly right, this went out of my control, and I appreciated > a lot the responses I got on various other issues in the past. I stop > now on the topic. > > The only seriously valid point for you developers in my e-mails - I > think - and the one I wanted to expose in the first e-mail I wrote - is > that we users really need a seriously maintained hardware database, and > a serious attention to all hardware related regressions, because you > can't change your hardware like you can change your software. This is > what from times to times leads me to a complete demotivation on keeping > supporting ubuntu - and I bet you as a developer care, not of me in > particular, but of the numbers. Ubuntu is so popular because developers > care about usability and understand what it is, but also because users > are openly advertising and supporting it as if it was The Salvation from > the Evil Microsoft. Don't loose this important advantage. Advocating Ubuntu doesn't mean you need to support it. Advocating in a company and propose a switch from MS Windows XP/Vista to Canonical+Ubuntu means, that you should have a point doing so. Software in general is not bug free, so mostly you need commercial support for your OS or other Software you are using. Canonical does provide Support for Ubuntu for You, when you want to pay it. If not, fix it yourself, or help us fixing it e.g. join the irc and point people to it. If people can't help you directly, because of not having the broken hardware, you can try to provide this hardware to the people (that's an example, and hey, this you can't do when you use MS Windows). > > If you start an officially endorsed hardware database with a forum for > comments and user-to-user support in launchpad etc, and keep an eye open > on regressions in hardware support, that should promptly be acknowledged > and put aside the relevant entries in the hardware database itself, and > that ideally should never be propagated to stable releases, but > _usually_ do, I am sure your user community will make a great job in > populating it. If you don't do that because of lack of manpower... I > understand and accept the reality. You know, there is more and more hardware on the market, old and new. And I never saw any hardware working out of the box which is quite new, not even on Windows. Most drivers for new hardware on Windows are broken...and believe me, asking the hardware vendor or creator, doesn't help to fix those drivers in time, not if you don't want to pay them. BTW, I do advocate Ubuntu in every company I'm working. And mostly I'm the cursed guy who is doing the support, too. You know what? If I can't fix it in time, I'll file a bug and I'm waiting. In the meantime, there are workarounds (e.g. using an external wifi card, using another graphics card driver etc.pp.) and most people are happy when they can use their computers, it doesn't matter how. Actually most people don't care about their special hardware they have in their laptops or desktop...they just want to work. TBH, if I really want to deploy Ubuntu as Desktop replacement, I'll call Canonical or one of their partners and order some special support contracts with developer support...it costs money, yes, but this should be in your budget for such a project. But in general, you shouldn't advocate things you can't handle. If you are not able to help people out of a bad situation, don't switch them..most likely people will not only hate the new OS, but they will hate you. If you really want to know which hardware is supported, you should read the vanilla kernel mailing list, because this is the most valuable source of finding out which hardware does work out of the box. If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts the hardware on the list of supported hardware. Regards, \sh -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
I feel your pain, a colleague of mine who was an administrator in my erst-while company. We had 100 desktops and we had close to 100 odd developer desktops switched to ubuntu. We had also made an apt-mirror to get updates but most of the time the updates were not used. Reason :- The admin had to spend too much time to see as and when things broke so he was static. Applications used :- 4-5 applications were used mostly a. Eclipse b. Openoffice.org c. Web-browsers (mostly Firefox) d. PHP e. Skype Hardware used :- Mostly Intel-based machine (C2D or whatever cheap we could find) , 1 GiB RAM on some machines, smattering of AMD based mobos, IDE HDD's and run of the mill monitors) Even on the few machines we did some updates, many a times it would break something or the other. The good point is that most of the times the worksaround was there on the forums but that takes time. Eventually we came to having a very static environment. Also the admin was never interested to file bugs in ubuntu simply because too much work (and language issues) I dunno if anything given in the post is helpful to the developers or not, or would be just 'noise' but felt like sharing hence did it. -- Regards, Shirish Agarwal This email is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com 065C 6D79 A68C E7EA 52B3 8D70 950D 53FB 729A 8B17 -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On 11/11/2008 Andrew Sayers wrote: > I'd like to hear Vincenzo's take on this, but it sounds to me like the > bugs here are: If you ask for it, I reply but try to be concise. It is much simpler than that: 1) One bug is there since more than one year (VGA out) and it is affecting many people that I know, that would have become ubuntu users but will not, and this makes me sad. It's not "my bug" and I wanted ubuntu developers to know that there are users who have opted not to switch to ubuntu for that reason. And it does not happen every day, that one decides to try and switch to another operating system, so we should care of not missing the train when it passes by. 2) Another bug affected me at random (WIFI), and there was nothing I could do about that, and it happened to me other times with other intel cards. I've not been clear perhaps, but the problem is that I was used to have my network card functioning, and one day it just left me without connection - after I moved abroad for one month, not after I upgraded. This is because intel's drivers mostly suck, there is no simpler explanation. They have tons of bugs and corner cases (I can support this by pointing at the number and gravity of LP bugs for them). I want to be able to rely and let others rely on ubuntu so we need to know what works and what not. 3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected and I feel like these should be a bit more acknowledged by developers. Because I can't be the only one. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On 11/11/2008 Felipe Figueiredo wrote:
> The kind of rant that started this thread
> is not only uncalled for, but in fact counterproductive. Not to
> mention
> these particular ones are unfair, incorrect and (as noted by several
> others) exaggerated. He was not asking if he was the one of many, he
> basically assumed it affected everyone. Also, he wrongly assumed the
> distribution is responsible for all the QA released, likely ignoring
> that are distribution bugs and upstream bugs.
>
> There, I did it, I bit the bait. Now can we please move on?
No we can't. We could if you had not pointed your finger directly to me,
now you have called me in cause and I have to reply, sorry if this will
augment noise (like your comment above, indeed). I pointed my finger
in the past, too, and learned that it is almost always a bad idea.
I would like to point out to you that I have made many people switch to
ubuntu in a professional environment (an academic department, by the
way), and other had to come, that I report every bug I find, and
encourage others to do so, trying to be as precise as my 22 years of
experience with computers can help me to be, and occasionally I wasted
working days (yes I am paid to do a real job like all the others here)
to learn to package fixes to stuff that maybe you even use or used
("left as an exercise" what stuff), just because "somebody should do the
dirty job sometimes".
I have spent much time, and I have sometimes had to quarrel with other
persons in my academic department, in various attempts to introduce and
defend the principles of free software and open formats in our official
regulations.
But I can't continue publicizing ubuntu if I can't rely on it - because
people will come back to me and I will pass for a liar and completely
ruin my public image.
So if, as you say, you CARE for ubuntu, you should be sorry that
experienced people that actually does some "door to door" assistance for
ubuntu, and helps the community (and I know we are many, I am not
claiming any particular personal merit) gets so p**sed off with the
current situation that they might want to stop doing this unpaid job.
If you really care for ubuntu, you probably will appreciate that its
huge success is also due to this network of users that really "believe"
in an independent distribution that is striving to change the world. Of
which you probably are a part.
In the current situation - keep in mind I can be considered a very
experienced user (for me, being asked to compile a driver on X is a
matter of wasting a quarter of hour, for example) - I had the unpleasant
experience to realise that I can rely on ubuntu _much less_ than on
windows on various machines that I had _carefully_ chosen because their
hardware is ADVERTIZED as SUPPORTING UBUNTU. Sometimes, all my experties
is not sufficient: it just can not do the job it is supposed to do. And
this happens also on the machines of other people in my department who I
was helping to SWITCH TO ubuntu (from windows, from fedora, and even
from OSX). This is very frustrating and surely not what ubuntu is aiming to.
This is why, in my first e-mail, I asked for _good documentation_ on
what hardware REALLY works. Which implies that, as soon as you have a
regression, you have to check if it is true (that is, to urgently triage
the bug) and eventually ADVERTIZE the regression on the SAME PAGE where
you ADVERTIZE THE HARDWARE. This is always done, the point is that you
have to do in weeks, not years. I am not in the position to impose
anything, though, if ubuntu has other priorities I can't change the reality.
The rest of the thread was an unuseful hurricane of repeated rants,
likely due to my frustration in being constrained to use windows, that
has been dealt with with __great kindness__ by other people, and frankly
"a posteriori" the fact that nobody flamed me (I don't consider yours
a flame yet) is surprising, given the tone of my subsequent e-mails.
Vincenzo
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On 11/11/2008 Scott Kitterman wrote: > > I would encourage you (and others, you certainly aren't the only one) > to hold > your temper and if you can't say something helpful, just take your > hands off > the keyboard. Being angry, contemptuous, and disrespectful won't get > your > bugs fixed faster. What it will get you is yet another list with no > developers on it and you upset you can't get in touch with them. You are perfectly right, this went out of my control, and I appreciated a lot the responses I got on various other issues in the past. I stop now on the topic. The only seriously valid point for you developers in my e-mails - I think - and the one I wanted to expose in the first e-mail I wrote - is that we users really need a seriously maintained hardware database, and a serious attention to all hardware related regressions, because you can't change your hardware like you can change your software. This is what from times to times leads me to a complete demotivation on keeping supporting ubuntu - and I bet you as a developer care, not of me in particular, but of the numbers. Ubuntu is so popular because developers care about usability and understand what it is, but also because users are openly advertising and supporting it as if it was The Salvation from the Evil Microsoft. Don't loose this important advantage. If you start an officially endorsed hardware database with a forum for comments and user-to-user support in launchpad etc, and keep an eye open on regressions in hardware support, that should promptly be acknowledged and put aside the relevant entries in the hardware database itself, and that ideally should never be propagated to stable releases, but _usually_ do, I am sure your user community will make a great job in populating it. If you don't do that because of lack of manpower... I understand and accept the reality. Bye Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
- Original Message From: Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 1:48:20 PM Subject: Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions) On Tuesday 11 November 2008 10:47, Luke L wrote: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Martin Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development > >> with developers. Comments like "I was just joking about you having to > >> know anything" make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously > >> considering it myself. > > > > It should remain, developers should remain. Developers are never going > > to get away from users who want to bitch, greater layers between the > > developers and users just breeds users who resent and don't understand > > developers and developers who don't understand (none programmer)user > > needs. Very Bad. > > > > So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very > > prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a > > standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the > > offence. > > > > On the other hand, list members should try not to bait the trolls. I've > > caught myself being suckered in too, so I know it's not easy. But why > > reward the wrong sort of emails with any response other than a boiler > > plait 'Your being rude' email? > > On a practical note, it isn't as if this ML is getting flooded with > hundreds of messages of traffic a day. For those who could benefit > from the technical discussions and user input, I don't see why someone > would disconnect themselves from that for the reason of saving > themselves 15 minutes a day. As long as there are "signals", the > "noise" should be dealt with and ultimately set aside. > Whether you see the reason for it or not, I guarantee you that fewer and fewer developers are subscribed to this list. The general reason is not 'too many messages' it's to much rudeness. Users on this list have a choice. Concerns can be raised in a way that is constructive, helpful, and brings us together or they can be raised in a divisive way. Offlist someone mentioned the example of kdvi brought up on this list a few months ago. Based on that user's request, I looked into the validity of their concern and found it had merit. As a result, I invested probably a dozen hours of my free time to repackage kdvi in a way that would work on Intrepid. Developers who are here do try to listen. It's up to you to chose how you decided to engage them in discussion. Scott K This message is meant to promote the cause of peace, although the rest of this paragraph might just make all sides equally angry with me. I have much sympathy for developers (especially the unpaid ones) who devote time and skill to a project and who have to suffer high levels of noise and even unreasonable criticism and intemperate language in mailing lists. However, I hope also that developers will manage to understand how frustration at being unable to solve problems through regular channels can drive people to escalate problems in not always the most productive ways. If it gives anyone some consolation, I will assure you that, having spent an entire professional career in my country's diplomatic service, flame wars just as bad as any here have been known to break out in e-mail discussions among foreign ministry colleagues. Is there any need to repeat the well-known tales about e-mail being an impersonal medium, something written gives the other person something to brood over, etc, etc? The problem is that, by its nature, flame wars will break out in e-mail and no number of Acceptable Use Policies nor exhortations to good behaviour will change that unhappy fact of human behaviour. It is a given that any face-to-face meeting of people needs someone to chair it, with a firm hand, if necessary, when the it slips off-topic (or worse). Until we have computers that can design better (better, not necessarily bigger) people, electronic discussions are invariably subject to the same stresses. My local LUG came up with a scheme which struck me as very sensible to have a couple of monitors who kept an eye on our mailing list, sought to deal in private e-mail with people who got too fired up, but who also had authority "to name and shame" and ultimately to ban repeat offenders from the list for whatever time the offence made appropriate. The current president of the LUG is a professor from the Department of Ma
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:03 AM, Martin Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with >> developers. Comments like "I was just joking about you having to know >> anything" make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering >> it myself. > > It should remain, developers should remain. I agree. If developers are unsubscribing from one of the two main development mailing lists, we have a serious communication problem in the community that needs to be addressed. When the distinction between -devel and -devel-discuss was set up, it relied on developers to take responsibility for following both lists. In the description of -devel-discuss, you see the phrase "Point of contact for Ubuntu users to reach Ubuntu developers". For this list to be successful, developers need to be reading it, or it's not worth having the list in the first place. > So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very > prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a > standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the > offence. That seems a good idea also. Unsubscribing from a mailing list is not the correct response to rudeness, it should be perfectly simple to correct it simply by pointing out some ground rules. That's why we have the code of conduct. If individuals who regularly read the list are interested in taking on the role of doing a little gentle moderating, then I'm pretty sure that it would be successful. From what I read on this list, I don't actually think that much intervention would be required. -- Matthew East http://www.mdke.org gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
I think there's some value in approaching this in a more technological way. Users of a program (Ubuntu's collection of online forums) find themselves looking in the wrong part of the program, or unable to understand the UI, or finding it too cumbersome to use. Then they become frustrated and wind up venting that frustration somewhere. That's neither unusual nor difficult to solve, it's just hard to think about objectively when you're a part of the program being ab-used. I'd like to hear Vincenzo's take on this, but it sounds to me like the bugs here are: 1) The user has been asked to spend a lot of time doing highly technical work to diagnose the problem (download and compile the git source for x.org on a laptop) 2) Responsibility for the bug hasn't been communicated to the user in a way that they understand - either in terms of the level of responsibility that's implied by responding to a bug report, or in terms of which project to talk to about issues. 3) The user has performed an action (updating Ubunutu) that had unforeseeable negative consequences (hardware regressions), and hasn't been presented with the option to undo that action. Some possible solutions to the above might be: 1) Use PPAs to build versions of packages specifically for testing one bug, preferably with some automated collection of logging information. 2) Allow responders to bugs to set a "relationship to bug" value that's attached to each message they send. For example, Bryce could have set his initial status to "curious", then "helping to diagnose", and finally "not my problem". 3) Allow users to downgrade all or part of Ubuntu as easily as they can upgrade. - Andrew -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Tuesday 11 November 2008 10:47, Luke L wrote: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Martin Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development > >> with developers. Comments like "I was just joking about you having to > >> know anything" make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously > >> considering it myself. > > > > It should remain, developers should remain. Developers are never going > > to get away from users who want to bitch, greater layers between the > > developers and users just breeds users who resent and don't understand > > developers and developers who don't understand (none programmer)user > > needs. Very Bad. > > > > So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very > > prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a > > standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the > > offence. > > > > On the other hand, list members should try not to bait the trolls. I've > > caught myself being suckered in too, so I know it's not easy. But why > > reward the wrong sort of emails with any response other than a boiler > > plait 'Your being rude' email? > > On a practical note, it isn't as if this ML is getting flooded with > hundreds of messages of traffic a day. For those who could benefit > from the technical discussions and user input, I don't see why someone > would disconnect themselves from that for the reason of saving > themselves 15 minutes a day. As long as there are "signals", the > "noise" should be dealt with and ultimately set aside. > Whether you see the reason for it or not, I guarantee you that fewer and fewer developers are subscribed to this list. The general reason is not 'too many messages' it's to much rudeness. Users on this list have a choice. Concerns can be raised in a way that is constructive, helpful, and brings us together or they can be raised in a divisive way. Offlist someone mentioned the example of kdvi brought up on this list a few months ago. Based on that user's request, I looked into the validity of their concern and found it had merit. As a result, I invested probably a dozen hours of my free time to repackage kdvi in a way that would work on Intrepid. Developers who are here do try to listen. It's up to you to chose how you decided to engage them in discussion. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 09:47 -0600, Luke L wrote: > On a practical note, it isn't as if this ML is getting flooded with > hundreds of messages of traffic a day. For those who could benefit > from the technical discussions and user input, I don't see why someone > would disconnect themselves from that for the reason of saving > themselves 15 minutes a day. As long as there are "signals", the > "noise" should be dealt with and ultimately set aside. OTOH, someone has to do this filtering. Will you moderate this list? I, as a user, don't want ubuntu developers wasting time dealing with uneducated users' requests that should otherwise be discussed in forums and brainstorm, dealing with users that consistently use bug reports as forums, and devel irc channels as support channels, etc. And it looks like no matter how polite you are with one, there will always be a hundred more tomorrow. Maybe I'm being a little BOFH-inspired, here, but I think this kind uneducated user sucks the life out of a project. There should be mechanisms to isolate these users to only communicate with other users, or to devels who want/need to deal with them, but it looks like the only way is to opt out. The fact that Ubuntu development is open to the public doesn't necessarily mean that anyone can join in *every* step of the process. The stages where people are welcome are well documented, and the ones that are more or less closed to a smaller proven group is left as an exercise to common sense. I fully understand why a devel would unsubscribe from this list, and I read it for only a few months. The kind of rant that started this thread is not only uncalled for, but in fact counterproductive. Not to mention these particular ones are unfair, incorrect and (as noted by several others) exaggerated. He was not asking if he was the one of many, he basically assumed it affected everyone. Also, he wrongly assumed the distribution is responsible for all the QA released, likely ignoring that are distribution bugs and upstream bugs. There, I did it, I bit the bait. Now can we please move on? regards FF -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Martin Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with >> developers. Comments like "I was just joking about you having to know >> anything" make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering >> it myself. > > It should remain, developers should remain. Developers are never going > to get away from users who want to bitch, greater layers between the > developers and users just breeds users who resent and don't understand > developers and developers who don't understand (none programmer)user > needs. Very Bad. > > So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very > prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a > standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the > offence. > > On the other hand, list members should try not to bait the trolls. I've > caught myself being suckered in too, so I know it's not easy. But why > reward the wrong sort of emails with any response other than a boiler > plait 'Your being rude' email? > > Regards, Martin > > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > On a practical note, it isn't as if this ML is getting flooded with hundreds of messages of traffic a day. For those who could benefit from the technical discussions and user input, I don't see why someone would disconnect themselves from that for the reason of saving themselves 15 minutes a day. As long as there are "signals", the "noise" should be dealt with and ultimately set aside. -- Luke L. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
> This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with > developers. Comments like "I was just joking about you having to know > anything" make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering > it myself. It should remain, developers should remain. Developers are never going to get away from users who want to bitch, greater layers between the developers and users just breeds users who resent and don't understand developers and developers who don't understand (none programmer)user needs. Very Bad. So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the offence. On the other hand, list members should try not to bait the trolls. I've caught myself being suckered in too, so I know it's not easy. But why reward the wrong sort of emails with any response other than a boiler plait 'Your being rude' email? Regards, Martin -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Monday 10 November 2008 18:14, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: > On 10/11/2008 Bryce Harrington wrote: > > > > You should know them very well :) In fact you were "assigned" to > > the > > > > case some point in time between winter and spring, or at least > > these > > > > were the words of somebody on the ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing > > list. > > > > I wasn't assigned, but I did work on your bug around that time, and > > found it to be an upstream bug so forwarded it. > > Yes I didn't ever take those words for serious but there was a thread on > this mailing list where an ubuntu developer said that "an xorg developer > had been assigned to the case". I was just joking about you having to > know anything. There has been a fair amount of chatter recently on IRC channels frequented by Ubuntu developers (none of which are secret, BTW) about the signal to noise ratio on this list. Many indicated that they are no longer subscribed. This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with developers. Comments like "I was just joking about you having to know anything" make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering it myself. I can understand being unhappy about regressions in particular and problems in general. I'm not happy when they hit me (there are items in the release notes for 8.10 that are there because of 'fun' I had after upgrading). I would encourage you (and others, you certainly aren't the only one) to hold your temper and if you can't say something helpful, just take your hands off the keyboard. Being angry, contemptuous, and disrespectful won't get your bugs fixed faster. What it will get you is yet another list with no developers on it and you upset you can't get in touch with them. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
