* Peter Tribble (peter.tribble at gmail.com) wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Dave Miner <dminer at opensolaris.org> wrote: > > Glenn Lagasse wrote: > > ... > > > > The above represents one of the criteria that have been applied in > > considering tasks available in the OpenSolaris installer. ?Glenn's pointed > > out one specific example that we haven't implemented yet, but remains under > > consideration. > > > > Another that's specific to interactive installers is to perform the set of > > tasks that "all" of the targeted users require in order to have a > > functioning system at the conclusion of the installation process. ?I say > > "all" because it's not truly 100%, but the threshold should be a > > super-majority of, say, 80%. ?This protects the usability of the installer > > for the majority by not inconveniencing them with unusual cases. > > Depends on your targeted users. A common question I see is "how do I > partition my drives and select the software to be installed?". Rather than > simply saying that advanced uses aren't allowed, we should work out how > to present an interface that allows expert use without interrupting the smooth > flow for the common case.
With the introduction of parted and Gparted into OpenSolaris recently, I expect we'll be able to do more around the first part of the question. We've talked about allowing package selection during installation as well at some point. > > Yet another criterion is whether the functionality truly requires user > > input, or instead can be accommodated by changes to the system's default > > behavior, or can be computed or inferred based on other choices. > > > > A key, but often overlooked, phrase in the above is *targeted users*. The > > current GUI, and live CD, is primarily targeted at desktop/laptop users who > > are new to OpenSolaris, because that represents a significant avenue for > > attracting developers. > > There's no doubt that the new installer has some success in that area. I > don't think that the Live CD is really suitable for the targeted developer - > primarily because there are significant things missing off the Live CD (such > as the total lack of any development tools). At the moment the Live CD is > reasonable for NetBook style use (but even there is short of key applications) > and demonstration, but it's a lot more work later to get it to a useful state > for other usage patterns. I think the liveCD is perfectly suitable for developers. It gives them media they can install and then add things to easily. How many developers actually develop while running directly from a liveCD? I know I sure wouldn't want to compile anything while running from a CD. > Also, while it's good to get developers attracted to the platform, we need to > make sure that they stay with the platform through deployment, and we're > doing nothing to help there. Can you expand on this more. I don't follow you. Cheers, -- Glenn
