Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
Fernando Parra a écrit : On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:42:03 +0100 Buchan Milne wrote: ... On Friday, 15 October 2010 03:48:56 Fernando Parra wrote: Hi everybody. I feel that the concept of a new way, as it exist into my mind is not completely understood. Let me try to re-explain again. Please be patient and excuses any mistake with my English (I'm totally out of practice): I'm talking about to liberate to novice/novel/without experience user, about concepts like backports, but I'm not talking about close/disappear/eliminate/forgot backports. Why? because a big share of them will arrive from a very different environment (especially windows), and as you now, in there those concepts are not only estrange, they simply don't exists. When a Windows user wants/needs to update a program, as much the only thing that he/she must do is unninstall the old/previous version and then install the new one. With Mandriva and thus initially Mageia, often one only has to select the new version, and the old version is automatically removed. Otherwise the old version can be removed later. So we already have it easier :) What programs? Following the same idea, about these kind of users, we should ask: what programs they usually upgrade? The answer could be found asking to the user's themselves, but certainly could be another ways. Why not all backports? Reason 1: Because a lot of them don't care about the new version of CUPS (in example) or the new version of Maxima (I'm sure there are a lot clearly examples). Reason 2: Because there are packages that may causes some incidents after upgrade them. How we can solve this situation? Offering a default automatic upgrade for a small group of packages, especially when they change in an important way, in example Firefox 3.6x 3.6x+ or to 4.x This is simply not advisable. In the event of a problem resulting from an automatic update, the user will have no idea what was done. So how easy will it be to support the user in such a case ? All changes should be expressly confirmed (or specifically requested) by the user. With this in mind: What aspects of the Mandriva backports solution are not satisfactory? -The fact that not everything is available as a backport? True in the Microsoft windows environnement, as everywhere else. Not all are in backports, more these users don't want/understand a big share of them So, we must "dumb down" everything, and not provide openldap backports for people running servers who want a convenient way to run the software version that will allow them to file bugs upstream (OpenLDAP team doesn't respond to bugs filed on non-current releases)? Specially here the answer is obvious: The novice doesn't now what is OpenLDAP! and maybe he wont hear about it for the rest of his life. New versions of OpenLDAP should be stay available in the backports repository, not as an automatic available upgrade. The user selects which backports they want. If they don't understand OpenLDAP, they wouldn't have a reason to select it. -That users don't know how to request a backport? That is true, more, they don't want to learn about that, they only want a new version of their favourite program. They will only likely want a new version of their favorite program if they know it is available. Which they will probably discover via backports. What do we do in the case where a new version of some software is available, and has been sent to cooker? How do we decide whether it should go to backports or not? And for which releases? (FYI, for Mandriva users can typically request backports in bugzilla or on IRC, but we may need better means). Agree 100%. The presentation definitely needs improvement. Ok, first at all, we must deicide what packages (not all of them!) will be at the Rolling Ligth model. After that, all this packages must have an appropriate path. -That too many backports are available? This is matter of who are revising backports, for novice? Yes there are to many. For the geek or the expert? Maybe never there will enough of them. -That all users don't get them by default? -That users doing network installs by default don't get the backport on initial installation? No, they are not get them if we will use a potentially problematic repository. -That users aren't aware of backports? -Something else? Panic? Fear? Baal, Luzbel and other demons in their minds? Technically speaking? Less than 'urpmi --searchmedia Backports chromium' ? If I was a novice my answer will be: What hell is that? Obviously the novice user would use Rpmdrake via the MCC. And Rpmdrake definitely needs improvement. This was a response to 'users must do less', not 'it must be very easy'. At present, users need to do just one thing. We can fix the ease of doing that one thing, if we understand the problem correctly
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 23:11 -0400, Marc Paré wrote: [...] > I think what this all boils down to is, does the Mageia project want to > actively seek out bugs and encourage its users to report bugs? If Mageia > is interested in seriously quashing bugs, then the reporting process has > to be streamlined in such a way as to encourage the reporting of bug as > painlessly as possible for users. It's a good question (although some projects prefer to keep it so that the people reporting bugs tend to be the ones able to give a clear description of the problem and ways to reproduce it)... but... Please do change the subject line if you go this-far off thread. I'm only checking each thread once a week or so and probably others do the same, not trying to read every message, as the volume is too high. But, more people could contribute if the mail-flood was easier. Which is not unlike your point about the bugs :-) Best, Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
Le 2010-10-16 18:35, Romain d'Alverny a écrit : On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 21:29, Marc Paré wrote: Le 2010-10-16 12:36, Ahmad Samir a écrit : It's much better to help the user formulate a useful bug report, that's easier / more productive for all involved parties. There would be no middle man. Once the middle-man could replicate the bug and verify the bug with other users, then the middle-man would submit to bugzilla. That's it. From there on, the middle-man will take care of testing requests from devs. As far as reporting back to the original user who reported the bug, as an extra gesture of kindness, the middle-man would just post on the "Report a bug" forum that the bug has been quashed or is still under review ... but not to the user but to the "Report a bug" forum. The idea is to keep the flow of possible bug reports coming in an organised way. The middle-man would have to be someone with a little more experience than that of a new user and also someone who has an interest in working this way. We will get more bug reports from users by keeping it simple and easy. Yes, and for everyone. I tend to agree with Ahmad, as well as with you. You may as well imagine we improve the Bugzilla process with a front-process, guiding the reporter about her bug report. That may be a forum with people active there, educating the user about the bug and the reporting process; And/or that may be a better designed bug reporting process with a better flow (providing and getting info to/from the user), querying a knowledge-base, filtering known/resolved queries out of yet-another-duplicate-bug-report and ultimately opening a bug in Bugzilla with a specific interaction to the user (so she knows what happens next).* That removes the middle-man issue and that filters out as well people that are not concerned enough to report/follow-up on a bug (provided the process is, indeed, better designed and better welcomes the end user). * moreover, I believe this type of improvement would benefit many, many, if not all, projects using a bug report tool. Cheers, Romain Thanks for the note Romain. I think what this all boils down to is, does the Mageia project want to actively seek out bugs and encourage its users to report bugs? If Mageia is interested in seriously quashing bugs, then the reporting process has to be streamlined in such a way as to encourage the reporting of bug as painlessly as possible for users. Human nature being what it is, people will gladly report a bug if there is a way to do so quickly and easily. However, it gets more complicated if you ask users to follow up on their bug report, as in bugzilla. IMHO, it would be easier if Mageia offered users: -- The reporting of bugs through bugzilla as is usually done, and the devs can work out these problems with the normal messaging that normally goes along with the bugzilla process. -- For users who have no intention of being part of bugzilla and who would still like to report a bug, a forum discussion where a "middle man" or "bug facilitator" would help triage the bugs in this forum, verify the bug and then submit it in their name. The user would not be obligated from this point on to involve herself with the testing of possible bug repairs. The "bug facilitator" would be obligated to the usual bugzilla process. Of course if the user wished to learn more and participate in the bugzilla process, then the "bug-facilitator" could help mentor the user to the bugzilla process. This way the user would have 2 methods of reporting, one with a certain amount of commitment and the other with no commitments other than reporting and doing a quick verification with the help of the "bug facilitator". The devs would not be part of this process and would work through the bugzilla as usual. And the bug reporting would, IMOH, be more streamlined. Marc
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 23:28:32 +0200 Luca Berra wrote: > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:41:31AM -0500, Fernando Parra wrote: > >On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:56:06 +0200 > >Luca Berra wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:00:14PM -0500, Fernando Parra wrote: > >> >The basic/novice user doesn't read anything, > >> remove basic/novice from the sentence and i will agree ;) > >> > > > >Are you agree with some like that? > >Only the geek/expert/professional users read? > I think most people don't read, sometime even geek/expert/professional > don't. This is probably due to an overload of information, and trying to > create messages that are actually 'seen' by users is becoming a new > branch of science. > I will try to answer. Nobody reads, yes it's the true (I'm a teacher I really know about the situation), but there are a magic exception. The user reads when he wants something. By example a lot of my students has a Notebook or a Laptop, and always have installed the last version of MSN Live, and of course the latest versions of their favourite games. How we can explain that? Are all this programs magically installed? No they install them as their wishes. But first appear a nice message invite them to upgrade. > >> > doesn't request anything to some like a bugzilla, > >> but give him a forum and he probably will > > > >Here I'm not completely sure, How many forums, blogs, etc. about software > >are there (including Windows, Mac and others)? and How many users they have? > >At present time the number of pc's in the entire world are estimated in > >1,500 millions, the number of users can be estimated without force the > >numbers as a twice of this number. Worst, we are in the Wikipedia age; in > >example, when I request an investigation to my students, about any theme. I > >need strictly keep out Wikipedia (Oh well, yes Encarta too) as a valid > >source. > > Then it is difficult to do what user want, if we don't get any feedback. > Well, you are right its difficult, but it isn't impossible. The big share of software publishers has statistics about at least of the number of downloads of their programs. And there are a lot of independent statistical measures. More, we have common sense (I hope!). And a final resource: we can make experiments, The Rolling Ligth program list shouldn't be like the 10 commandments (static per secula seculorum), As the software it is permanent state of change, the user's preferences are in a permanent evolution. > ... > >> Seriuosly speaking, i'd like to make a distinguo: > >> The real basic(*) user just uses a computer to get her work done, he > >> does not give a damn about a new version of firefox, kde or wathever, as > >> long as the version she is using is functioning. > ... > >Are you sure? I'll try to explain me with a practical example: I really > >don't remember what of the versions of the Open Office 3.x branch open the > >road to read and write the MS Office 2007 (docx, etc) but when its happen, > >it was "the great success" How many users really need this particular > >"goodie", I think a big share of them! > > well i had in mind a real life example when i wrote the above > ... > >> we should not mix the needs of this two categories, neither would like > >> it. > > > >Ok, I call these users "intermediate users" and here in Mexico we have an > >idiomatic expression for these situations: "El qué quiera azul celeste, ¡que > >le cueste!" A poor translation of that is: If someone want something > >special, pays for get it! > the above stands, these categories have different needs and whishes. > > >> btw, we also have users interested in backports of stuff like openldap, > >> samba or such, these users will actually contribute to the technical > >> making of the distro, either by using bugzilla when they find bugs or > >> actually doing packaging work. Ignoring the will of such users will, > >> sooner or later, force mageia to employ paid personnel to do packaging > >> work. > > > >I disagree here, a big share of the users are sick (including me) of an > >illness called "versionitis gravis". Good I'm sick!:) As I can see there are > >two variants of the illness: > I just meant that many people working on packaging are also using the > distro for running servers, so we are interested in server stuff, which > the average user wont' prolly give a sh@@@ about. Well, I'm thinking a lot in the server users, As a server administrator I'm very conservative (but it is only my POV) before to say anything I'm reading more opinions about the Rolling Light in servers. You can read an interesting thread a the discuss mail list, specially one of the mails is about a college that prefer install CentOS in their desktops PC, because they don't want to support two different distros, and they choose CentOS as a server. Well the ball is on the air. The Mageia Server should be a Rolling Ligth distro, yes or no? Regards from Mexico. -- Fernando Parra
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 21:29, Marc Paré wrote: > Le 2010-10-16 12:36, Ahmad Samir a écrit : > >> It's much better to help the user formulate a useful bug report, >> that's easier / more productive for all involved parties. > > There would be no middle man. Once the middle-man could replicate the bug > and verify the bug with other users, then the middle-man would submit to > bugzilla. That's it. From there on, the middle-man will take care of testing > requests from devs. > > As far as reporting back to the original user who reported the bug, as an > extra gesture of kindness, the middle-man would just post on the "Report a > bug" forum that the bug has been quashed or is still under review ... but > not to the user but to the "Report a bug" forum. > > The idea is to keep the flow of possible bug reports coming in an organised > way. The middle-man would have to be someone with a little more experience > than that of a new user and also someone who has an interest in working this > way. We will get more bug reports from users by keeping it simple and easy. Yes, and for everyone. I tend to agree with Ahmad, as well as with you. You may as well imagine we improve the Bugzilla process with a front-process, guiding the reporter about her bug report. That may be a forum with people active there, educating the user about the bug and the reporting process; And/or that may be a better designed bug reporting process with a better flow (providing and getting info to/from the user), querying a knowledge-base, filtering known/resolved queries out of yet-another-duplicate-bug-report and ultimately opening a bug in Bugzilla with a specific interaction to the user (so she knows what happens next).* That removes the middle-man issue and that filters out as well people that are not concerned enough to report/follow-up on a bug (provided the process is, indeed, better designed and better welcomes the end user). * moreover, I believe this type of improvement would benefit many, many, if not all, projects using a bug report tool. Cheers, Romain
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:41:31AM -0500, Fernando Parra wrote: On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:56:06 +0200 Luca Berra wrote: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:00:14PM -0500, Fernando Parra wrote: >The basic/novice user doesn't read anything, remove basic/novice from the sentence and i will agree ;) Are you agree with some like that? Only the geek/expert/professional users read? I think most people don't read, sometime even geek/expert/professional don't. This is probably due to an overload of information, and trying to create messages that are actually 'seen' by users is becoming a new branch of science. > doesn't request anything to some like a bugzilla, but give him a forum and he probably will Here I'm not completely sure, How many forums, blogs, etc. about software are there (including Windows, Mac and others)? and How many users they have? At present time the number of pc's in the entire world are estimated in 1,500 millions, the number of users can be estimated without force the numbers as a twice of this number. Worst, we are in the Wikipedia age; in example, when I request an investigation to my students, about any theme. I need strictly keep out Wikipedia (Oh well, yes Encarta too) as a valid source. Then it is difficult to do what user want, if we don't get any feedback. ... Seriuosly speaking, i'd like to make a distinguo: The real basic(*) user just uses a computer to get her work done, he does not give a damn about a new version of firefox, kde or wathever, as long as the version she is using is functioning. ... Are you sure? I'll try to explain me with a practical example: I really don't remember what of the versions of the Open Office 3.x branch open the road to read and write the MS Office 2007 (docx, etc) but when its happen, it was "the great success" How many users really need this particular "goodie", I think a big share of them! well i had in mind a real life example when i wrote the above ... we should not mix the needs of this two categories, neither would like it. Ok, I call these users "intermediate users" and here in Mexico we have an idiomatic expression for these situations: "El qué quiera azul celeste, ¡que le cueste!" A poor translation of that is: If someone want something special, pays for get it! the above stands, these categories have different needs and whishes. btw, we also have users interested in backports of stuff like openldap, samba or such, these users will actually contribute to the technical making of the distro, either by using bugzilla when they find bugs or actually doing packaging work. Ignoring the will of such users will, sooner or later, force mageia to employ paid personnel to do packaging work. I disagree here, a big share of the users are sick (including me) of an illness called "versionitis gravis". Good I'm sick!:) As I can see there are two variants of the illness: I just meant that many people working on packaging are also using the distro for running servers, so we are interested in server stuff, which the average user wont' prolly give a sh@@@ about. L. -- Luca Berra -- bl...@vodka.it
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
Le 2010-10-16 16:08, Frederic Janssens a écrit : On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 21:52, Renaud MICHEL mailto:r.h.michel%2bmag...@gmail.com>> wrote: I think it may work if those "bug friends" (don't remember who proposed that name) only take for themselves the simple, one package, software only bugs, and suggest to the reporter to create himself a bugreport (eventually providing assistance if the reporter has never done it before) yes, it is mainly there that 'help with followup' is needed. If that help is well done, a certain number of the helped could become helpers later on. describing his problem, because the devs will really need his feedback first hand. That forum would be an easier entry point than bugzilla for users not familiar with bugreports. -- Renaud Michel Frederic Thanks Frederic, my feeling also. Marc
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
Le 2010-10-16 15:52, Renaud MICHEL a écrit : On samedi 16 octobre 2010 at 21:29, Marc Paré wrote : There would be no middle man. Once the middle-man could replicate the bug and verify the bug with other users, then the middle-man would submit to bugzilla. That's it. From there on, the middle-man will take care of testing requests from devs. That would only work for pure software bugs. If the bug is hardware related, it is unlikely that the "middle man" will be able to reproduce it. For those we really need the input from the real bug reporter. And for software bugs, the "middle man" would have to reproduce the software environment of the reporter, which may be complicated if he installed software from third party (or worse, proprietary software). Sometimes the problem is obvious and only related to a single package, and for such case a forum with some contributors reproducing the bug and then submitting a bug report may work. But if the problem is related to a particular combination of packages then the "middle man" could spend a considerable amount of time replicating the reporter particular configuration before he can actually reproduce the bug. I think it may work if those "bug friends" (don't remember who proposed that name) only take for themselves the simple, one package, software only bugs, and suggest to the reporter to create himself a bugreport (eventually providing assistance if the reporter has never done it before) describing his problem, because the devs will really need his feedback first hand. That forum would be an easier entry point than bugzilla for users not familiar with bugreports. Yes you are perfectly right. This is where the the bug report would be ramped up to the bugzilla stage, and at the point, the reporter would have obviously shown an interest in the resolution/fix of the bug. This would in effect would create a mentorhsip/reporter relationship and a great training opportunity for the reporter. We would then have, by default, a mentorship programme in the "Report a bug" forum that may eventually form other "bug friends" This would be a great opportunity for Mageia to teach reporters how to use bugzilla. IMHO, this would still be a simple way of dealing with normal users who do not want to involve themselves any more than reporting a bug. And for those who develop a taste for furthering their knowledge of the process of bug reporting, the "bug friend" could then mentor this person ... who could eventually become a "bug friend" himself/herself. Marc
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 21:52, Renaud MICHEL > wrote: > I think it may work if those "bug friends" (don't remember who proposed > that > name) only take for themselves the simple, one package, software only bugs, > and suggest to the reporter to create himself a bugreport (eventually > providing assistance if the reporter has never done it before) yes, it is mainly there that 'help with followup' is needed. If that help is well done, a certain number of the helped could become helpers later on. describing > his problem, because the devs will really need his feedback first hand. > That forum would be an easier entry point than bugzilla for users not > familiar with bugreports. > > -- > Renaud Michel > -- Frederic
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On samedi 16 octobre 2010 at 21:29, Marc Paré wrote : > There would be no middle man. Once the middle-man could replicate the > bug and verify the bug with other users, then the middle-man would > submit to bugzilla. That's it. From there on, the middle-man will take > care of testing requests from devs. That would only work for pure software bugs. If the bug is hardware related, it is unlikely that the "middle man" will be able to reproduce it. For those we really need the input from the real bug reporter. And for software bugs, the "middle man" would have to reproduce the software environment of the reporter, which may be complicated if he installed software from third party (or worse, proprietary software). Sometimes the problem is obvious and only related to a single package, and for such case a forum with some contributors reproducing the bug and then submitting a bug report may work. But if the problem is related to a particular combination of packages then the "middle man" could spend a considerable amount of time replicating the reporter particular configuration before he can actually reproduce the bug. I think it may work if those "bug friends" (don't remember who proposed that name) only take for themselves the simple, one package, software only bugs, and suggest to the reporter to create himself a bugreport (eventually providing assistance if the reporter has never done it before) describing his problem, because the devs will really need his feedback first hand. That forum would be an easier entry point than bugzilla for users not familiar with bugreports. -- Renaud Michel
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
Le 2010-10-16 12:36, Ahmad Samir a écrit : But generally reporting bugs by proxy is always a bad idea, unless the guy who'll play middle-man can reproduce the exact same bug on his own box. You see, triage team / package maintainer / dev will ask for info about the bug, more than once depending on the bug itself; now Mr. middle-man will have to go to and fro a lot of times, taking info from the user and posting it in bugzilla then taking questions/info from the bugzilla and conveying it to the user; now that's a tedious and tiresome job that's very prone to failure. (it's like a friend being sick and instead of him going to the doctor he sends you on his behalf because "you know the symptoms" :)). It's much better to help the user formulate a useful bug report, that's easier / more productive for all involved parties. There would be no middle man. Once the middle-man could replicate the bug and verify the bug with other users, then the middle-man would submit to bugzilla. That's it. From there on, the middle-man will take care of testing requests from devs. As far as reporting back to the original user who reported the bug, as an extra gesture of kindness, the middle-man would just post on the "Report a bug" forum that the bug has been quashed or is still under review ... but not to the user but to the "Report a bug" forum. The idea is to keep the flow of possible bug reports coming in an organised way. The middle-man would have to be someone with a little more experience than that of a new user and also someone who has an interest in working this way. We will get more bug reports from users by keeping it simple and easy. Marc
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On 16 October 2010 17:31, Marc Paré wrote: > Le 2010-10-16 02:56, Luca Berra a écrit : >> >> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:00:14PM -0500, Fernando Parra wrote: >>> >>> The basic/novice user doesn't read anything, >> >> remove basic/novice from the sentence and i will agree ;) >> >>> doesn't request anything to some like a bugzilla, >> >> but give him a forum and he probably will >> > > This statement I totally agree with! If a user is told to submit in > bugzilla, I find that they will not do it. Reporting to bugzilla for a user, > is one more level of serious commitment on their part and most will not want > to commit themselves to it. > > However, if they can report to a forum, this is different. Users view forums > as community involvement with community feedback. They may be ask to test > out the problem and report back on the result (just like in bugzilla) but > they know that other community members will be there to lend a hand and > support. And other community members are there in bugzilla to to lend a hand and support (although a bit different kind of support as bugzilla's have stricter rules, more organised). > > If we are going to be really interested in quashing bugs with a lot of > community involvement, IMHO, I think that we should offer > > -- bugzilla for the enthused and commited users. These people are interested > on reporting bugs the right way and will replicated and help in debugging. > > -- but for ordinary users, we could offer them a "Report a bug" forum where > they can report a bug; the community could then replicated the bug; have a > "Bug-ambassador" or "bug-reporter" or who could then submit it > officially on bugzilla. Tracking of that particular bug could then be the > responsibility of the "Bug-ambassador"; once the bug is quashed, the > "Bug-ambassador" could report back to the "Report a bug" forum of the bug > fix and thank the community for their help. This would help validate the > user who reported the bug and make him/her feel like a part of the > contributing team. > > IMHO, this would work a lot better for the majority of users who do not want > to commit to any more than reporting the bug; the devs would get a more > constant stream of bug submissions by "Bug-ambassadors" who are able to > triage submitted bugs on the forum. > > Doing it this way would still make bugzilla the only place where devs would > go to pick up bug information and the "Bug-ambassadors" would be the people > who triage the bugs at the forum level. > > Marc > > Backport requests are a special case as they're usually a 2-line report "hey, could you backport the latest version of package foo to ?", so basically anyone can do it, either the user or someone on his behalf. But generally reporting bugs by proxy is always a bad idea, unless the guy who'll play middle-man can reproduce the exact same bug on his own box. You see, triage team / package maintainer / dev will ask for info about the bug, more than once depending on the bug itself; now Mr. middle-man will have to go to and fro a lot of times, taking info from the user and posting it in bugzilla then taking questions/info from the bugzilla and conveying it to the user; now that's a tedious and tiresome job that's very prone to failure. (it's like a friend being sick and instead of him going to the doctor he sends you on his behalf because "you know the symptoms" :)). It's much better to help the user formulate a useful bug report, that's easier / more productive for all involved parties. -- Ahmad Samir
Re: [Mageia-dev] Q: how long should we able to upgrade from?
On 16 October 2010 13:33, Luca Berra wrote: > > I maintain some package that has multiple spec and initscript hacks to > allow upgrading since 2005LE to current cooker (i.e. postfix). I really > believe it is too far and that some should be pruned. > The question is, how long should we maintain suck > hacks in packages? 2005LE??? even in MandrivaLinux, you should have care only about 2008.0, 2009.1, 2010.x, CS4 & MES5 See http://www2.mandriva.com/en/support/lifecycle/ As for Mageia, I would say we shouldn't care about the past but for the smooth upgrade path. Aka we shouldn't care if packages aren't backportable on anything older than 2010.1 but we should care about updating mdv 2009.1/2010.x/CS4/MES5 to mageia which should help packaging quite a lot. My 2 €cents
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 11:52:27 +0200 Renaud MICHEL wrote: > Hello > On samedi 16 octobre 2010 at 05:00, Fernando Parra wrote : > > > On Friday, 15 October 2010 03:48:56 Fernando Parra wrote: > > > So, we must "dumb down" everything, and not provide openldap backports > > > for people running servers who want a convenient way to run the > > > software version that will allow them to file bugs upstream (OpenLDAP > > > team doesn't respond to bugs filed on non-current releases)? > > > > Specially here the answer is obvious: The novice doesn't now what is > > OpenLDAP! and maybe he wont hear about it for the rest of his life. New > > versions of OpenLDAP should be stay available in the backports > > repository, not as an automatic available upgrade. > > Well, for example like OpenLDAP it is not a problem, because only users that > need it will install it, and those that might need it are most likely aware > what it implies to upgrade it to a newer version. So it will not bother > other users if it is in backports or even updates, because as they won't > have it installed, they won't be proposed to update. > > It is more of a concern for things like cups or dbus, which most users will > use without knowing it, and won't know how to fix if it breaks (not even > knowing which package actually broke). > > > > What do we do in the case where a new version of some software is > > > available, and has been sent to cooker? How do we decide whether it > > > should go to backports or not? And for which releases? > > > > > > (FYI, for Mandriva users can typically request backports in bugzilla or > > > on IRC, but we may need better means). > > > > Ok, first at all, we must deicide what packages (not all of them!) will > > be at the Rolling Ligth model. After that, all this packages must have > > an appropriate path. > > I don't understand what you mean by "appropriate path". > Well, if we are talking about a new model, I think we need to redefine what will be the way that's Mageia offer these particular (Rolling Light) packages. I'm not closed to any method in particular. > I think we should not decide before hand what packages will be backported, > we should maybe have a (short) list of packages that must not be backported > (like glibc) and then have backports either when contributors are willing to > make (and test) them, or on request. > > Maybe we could also have a (short also) list of packages that we should > really try (the packaging team could decide to dedicate some of his > resources to that) to backport to the latest stable release, and maybe the > previous latest. > Such packages would be for example firefox or OOo, packages that we know are > used by many (most) users, and many users are likely to want a newer > version. > > > Anyway, after decide what packages will be in the Rolling Light, The OS > > must be gentle with the user and show a Window with a Message like that: > > > > There are available a new version of Firefox(as an example). Do you want > > to install it? NO, Maybe Later, Show me more information,Yes > > A little OT, but: > > Dialog windows should (almost) never have yes/no or ok/cancel choices, > because when an user see a yes/ok choice, he generally interpret it as "yes, > I want to keep on doing what I was doing". (and I know I have done it some > times myself) > > In your example, the No/yes should be labelled something like "keep current > version" and "install new version". > Ok, as more clear options, as it will be better. > > cheers > -- > Renaud Michel > Regards from Mexico -- Fernando Parra
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:56:06 +0200 Luca Berra wrote: > On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:00:14PM -0500, Fernando Parra wrote: > >The basic/novice user doesn't read anything, > remove basic/novice from the sentence and i will agree ;) > Are you agree with some like that? Only the geek/expert/professional users read? > > doesn't request anything to some like a bugzilla, > but give him a forum and he probably will Here I'm not completely sure, How many forums, blogs, etc. about software are there (including Windows, Mac and others)? and How many users they have? At present time the number of pc's in the entire world are estimated in 1,500 millions, the number of users can be estimated without force the numbers as a twice of this number. Worst, we are in the Wikipedia age; in example, when I request an investigation to my students, about any theme. I need strictly keep out Wikipedia (Oh well, yes Encarta too) as a valid source. > > > If you show on his screen some like your proposal, he usually take one of > > two different ways: 1) Check all the options or maybe worst 2) Close the > > window and he will think: "Oh hell, Why Linux is so hard?" > then we shall abuse the user like most windows installers do, and > install all sort of crap with preselected checkboxes? > > >Anyway, after decide what packages will be in the Rolling Light > was the model decided yet? > As you may watch, this discussion is on the way. > >The OS must be gentle with the user and show a Window with a Message like > >that: > > > >There are available a new version of Firefox(as an example). Do you want to > >install it? > >NO, Maybe Later, Show me more information,Yes > popups like this are not gentle, they are annoying, users will try to > get rid of them as soon as they can and go on with what they were doing. > Ok, maybe is no quite gentle for some one, but it is the usually way, speaking about Windows users. > >Please take in mind that we are trying to get a considerable number of new > >users. If we just keep doing things like today, we will certainly have new > >users, but they probably come from other distributions. > > Seriuosly speaking, i'd like to make a distinguo: > The real basic(*) user just uses a computer to get her work done, he > does not give a damn about a new version of firefox, kde or wathever, as > long as the version she is using is functioning. > A popup stating about a new version will probably cause a call to her > son, either before or after having got rid of it, depending on the > moment. > The problem with this kind of user is getting them to apply security > updates. Are you sure? I'll try to explain me with a practical example: I really don't remember what of the versions of the Open Office 3.x branch open the road to read and write the MS Office 2007 (docx, etc) but when its happen, it was "the great success" How many users really need this particular "goodie", I think a big share of them! > > (*) i won't call them novice because they might have been using a > computer for a good deal of time. > > Another kind of user is amused by computers, he will read some > semi-technical magazines, every leaflet from big electronic shop, some > news site, he will buy a lot of gadgets, and will try to install new > versions of everything, just to see how they work. > This user is probably interested of seeing backports of firefox, gnome, > kde, Ooo, and such. > He will probably not bother with bugzilla (why the do i have to > input all this crap, cant they just provide me with gizmo 1.99.2.3 like > every windows user has?), but probably will do such a request on a forum > like media. > > we should not mix the needs of this two categories, neither would like > it. Ok, I call these users "intermediate users" and here in Mexico we have an idiomatic expression for these situations: "El qué quiera azul celeste, ¡que le cueste!" A poor translation of that is: If someone want something special, pays for get it! > > btw, we also have users interested in backports of stuff like openldap, > samba or such, these users will actually contribute to the technical > making of the distro, either by using bugzilla when they find bugs or > actually doing packaging work. Ignoring the will of such users will, > sooner or later, force mageia to employ paid personnel to do packaging > work. > > L. > I disagree here, a big share of the users are sick (including me) of an illness called "versionitis gravis". Good I'm sick!:) As I can see there are two variants of the illness: Open Source Type, we are totally involved in each new release of our favourite distro, there is no matter how many times we make a promise of stay in the same release for at least one year, at the end of the road, we find a "valid" excuse for install and use the new version. Privative Type: There is no matter if their favourite music player is going on, each time than appear a new version the users download and i
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
Le 2010-10-16 02:56, Luca Berra a écrit : On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:00:14PM -0500, Fernando Parra wrote: The basic/novice user doesn't read anything, remove basic/novice from the sentence and i will agree ;) doesn't request anything to some like a bugzilla, but give him a forum and he probably will This statement I totally agree with! If a user is told to submit in bugzilla, I find that they will not do it. Reporting to bugzilla for a user, is one more level of serious commitment on their part and most will not want to commit themselves to it. However, if they can report to a forum, this is different. Users view forums as community involvement with community feedback. They may be ask to test out the problem and report back on the result (just like in bugzilla) but they know that other community members will be there to lend a hand and support. If we are going to be really interested in quashing bugs with a lot of community involvement, IMHO, I think that we should offer -- bugzilla for the enthused and commited users. These people are interested on reporting bugs the right way and will replicated and help in debugging. -- but for ordinary users, we could offer them a "Report a bug" forum where they can report a bug; the community could then replicated the bug; have a "Bug-ambassador" or "bug-reporter" or who could then submit it officially on bugzilla. Tracking of that particular bug could then be the responsibility of the "Bug-ambassador"; once the bug is quashed, the "Bug-ambassador" could report back to the "Report a bug" forum of the bug fix and thank the community for their help. This would help validate the user who reported the bug and make him/her feel like a part of the contributing team. IMHO, this would work a lot better for the majority of users who do not want to commit to any more than reporting the bug; the devs would get a more constant stream of bug submissions by "Bug-ambassadors" who are able to triage submitted bugs on the forum. Doing it this way would still make bugzilla the only place where devs would go to pick up bug information and the "Bug-ambassadors" would be the people who triage the bugs at the forum level. Marc
[Mageia-dev] Q: how long should we able to upgrade from?
short explanation: I maintain some package that has multiple spec and initscript hacks to allow upgrading since 2005LE to current cooker (i.e. postfix). I really believe it is too far and that some should be pruned. The question is, how long should we maintain suck hacks in packages? -- Luca Berra -- bl...@vodka.it
Re: [Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?
Hello On samedi 16 octobre 2010 at 05:00, Fernando Parra wrote : > > On Friday, 15 October 2010 03:48:56 Fernando Parra wrote: > > So, we must "dumb down" everything, and not provide openldap backports > > for people running servers who want a convenient way to run the > > software version that will allow them to file bugs upstream (OpenLDAP > > team doesn't respond to bugs filed on non-current releases)? > > Specially here the answer is obvious: The novice doesn't now what is > OpenLDAP! and maybe he wont hear about it for the rest of his life. New > versions of OpenLDAP should be stay available in the backports > repository, not as an automatic available upgrade. Well, for example like OpenLDAP it is not a problem, because only users that need it will install it, and those that might need it are most likely aware what it implies to upgrade it to a newer version. So it will not bother other users if it is in backports or even updates, because as they won't have it installed, they won't be proposed to update. It is more of a concern for things like cups or dbus, which most users will use without knowing it, and won't know how to fix if it breaks (not even knowing which package actually broke). > > What do we do in the case where a new version of some software is > > available, and has been sent to cooker? How do we decide whether it > > should go to backports or not? And for which releases? > > > > (FYI, for Mandriva users can typically request backports in bugzilla or > > on IRC, but we may need better means). > > Ok, first at all, we must deicide what packages (not all of them!) will > be at the Rolling Ligth model. After that, all this packages must have > an appropriate path. I don't understand what you mean by "appropriate path". I think we should not decide before hand what packages will be backported, we should maybe have a (short) list of packages that must not be backported (like glibc) and then have backports either when contributors are willing to make (and test) them, or on request. Maybe we could also have a (short also) list of packages that we should really try (the packaging team could decide to dedicate some of his resources to that) to backport to the latest stable release, and maybe the previous latest. Such packages would be for example firefox or OOo, packages that we know are used by many (most) users, and many users are likely to want a newer version. > Anyway, after decide what packages will be in the Rolling Light, The OS > must be gentle with the user and show a Window with a Message like that: > > There are available a new version of Firefox(as an example). Do you want > to install it? NO, Maybe Later, Show me more information,Yes A little OT, but: Dialog windows should (almost) never have yes/no or ok/cancel choices, because when an user see a yes/ok choice, he generally interpret it as "yes, I want to keep on doing what I was doing". (and I know I have done it some times myself) In your example, the No/yes should be labelled something like "keep current version" and "install new version". cheers -- Renaud Michel
