Michelle Olson wrote:
>> Install blurs the line between OpenSolaris.org the code community and
>> OpenSolaris.com the distro community - are we moving away from that
>> distinction?
>
> I'm not moving away from any distinctions I haven't ever subscribed to
> :) But seriously, I can't act on what you say here, the word 'install'
> doesn't blur any lines all by itself, so it must be the target of the
> link that needs fixing? If so, let's discuss what should be found at the
> link target.
Fixing the link to point to a page listing all distributions would be one
of solving it, but then how is that different than the Download page? Just
that it's the subset of that page for distros, not the sources?
>> Are the Contribute a Package instructions ready for such prominent
>> exposure?
>
> Fair question, and precisely the point of this review.
>
>> That page has more questions than answers, (and the answers
>> it has are confusing in steps - you don't build a webrev,
>
> Is this specifically about the word 'build' or is there a bigger issue
> here?
There's much bigger issues - if you're looking for specific review of the
instructions there, then here's what I see:
- "Before You Begin" tells you to use the build mechanism from pkgbase
or pkgbuild, but Step 1 below instructs you to check out some code
from Mercurial, which isn't used by either one.
- "Before You Begin" suggests use of pkgbase for desktop-like code, which
seems backwards, since pkgbuild is the tool JDS created for building
desktop-like code (and pkgbase is just a collection of software spec
files for use with pkgbuild, not an alternative build system).
- Step 1: what original source code should be checked out with Mercurial here?
Neither SFW nor JDS use mercurial, and ON won't be taking on most new
external open source packages.
- Step 3: This says to create a webrev for review, but never says how to get
the code reviewed.
- Step 4: webrevs are web pages that humans look at to do code review, you
can't build software from them. For a consolidation using mercurial,
you could say "Submit a changeset to the build system" - but since as noted
above, that's unlikely, it would probably be better to say something generic
such as "Submit your changes to the build system".
- Step 4: the instructions say that you are submitting to a build system for
some consolidation, but they don't tell you how to do that at all. I would
be surprised if the build system described exists, since it claims to know
how to build different consolidations, and the build processes are very
different between say, SFW & JDS.
The example shown in Step 4 is actually how to create a new OS image and
install packages there (from a opensolaris.org repo URL that can't work) and
then boot into them. That should be the example for step 5 (test your
changes), but can't be done until after step 7 (publish the package to your
depot).
- Step 8: What e-mail address or web form does "us" translate to in "send us
the URL"?
- Criteria for inclusion - this is still an ongoing discussion, and some of
these may or may not match the final outcome.
>> and I don't
>> think pkg.opensolaris.org/myusername works at all)
>
> Right, do you know of an equivalent step or set of steps?
No, because pkg.opensolaris.org isn't set up for people to run their own
repositories on.
>> and only really
>> tells them how to host packages if they have a dedicated repository
>> server set up somewhere,
>
> Now you've lost me in the parenthetical above. Do you mean to say that
> /myusername tells someone how to post packages if folks have a dedicated
> repo set up somewhere?
No, I mean the instructions are mixed, since they tell you both that you
have to have a private repo, but then give URL's to opensolaris.org repos.
>> not how to contribute to the pkg.opensolaris.org
>> repository,
>
> So, we need the contribute process steps sorted out?
Yes, and a contrib repo set up, neither of which seems likely in the few days
before you'd be posting a new feature spot.
>> which isn't accepting direct contributions yet.
>>
>
> Right, nor will it, from what I understand, there will be a process for
> pending and contrib that won't be direct.
But pending and contrib don't exist at all yet.
>> Report a Bug just dumps you on the bugzilla front page, which as someone
>> pointed out last week, is really a horrible place to start, leaving you
>> with no clue how to report bugs - the page Dave Miner made for the
>> 2008.11
>> release candidates would be a much better place to link to:
>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/indiana/resources/reporting_bugs/
>>
> I'm not sure that I agree that this page about reporting bugs on 2008.11
> is a better/simpler/easier place to land at all if you're starting from
> the home page of opensolaris.org. Do we have more data than one person's
> opinion? I'm sure we can find a middle-ground that is better than the
> bugzilla front page and less ovewhelming than the reporting_bugs page.
I was suggesting that page is better than the current bugzilla front page,
but if the bugzilla front page could be updated or a new page created, that
could be even better - that is just the best I know of right now.
Problems with our current bug pages:
- We have two, neither of which tells you about the other or what the
relationship is. Bugs that should go to bugs.os.o end up on defect.os.o
and vice versa, since only the people working the bug transition know
the difference (I've heard from a lot of Sun engineers who don't know and
are confused when they hear we have two bug dbs). Users searching for a
bug won't know they need to search in both to see if a bug is known, and
users filing a bug don't know which to use. I can't explain why one is
"Issues" and the other is "Defects" in the subsites link bar.
defect.opensolaris.org:
- On "Enter a new bug report", the first choice is an unused testing category
which should be removed from the list, not the most prominent option.
- The introductory paragraph, with the top two links, are about how the site
admins install and configure bugzilla, not anything most users will need.
- Nothing on defects.opensolaris.org besides the URL tells you it's an
OpenSolaris page. It would be nice to get a skin applied to it to make
it look more like other opensolaris.org pages, but at least putting something
on the default landing page to say "This is the OpenSolaris bugzilla" would
be good. (For examples of better bugzilla landing pages, see
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/ or https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ )
- It would be good if it answered the second most frequently asked question I
get - "How do I login? My opensolaris.org account doesn't work!" (The
first being "What's the difference between that & bugster/bugs.os.o? Which
should I use?") Tying authentication to Alan Burlison's auth system would
solve this long term, but in the short term it could use some text explaining
it's a seperate user/password database, and you need to create a new account
on first use.
bugs.opensolaris.org:
- The "not guaranteed" link on bugs.opensolaris.org goes to a Java bug
reporting FAQ which doesn't mention anything about not guaranteeing fixes,
and tells you to use their bug submission page instead.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
_______________________________________________
website-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
