Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Christian Perrier]

Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> > DevRef 6.2.2
> 
> > The point is avoiding to have a huge list at "A(n)" and "The" when
> > sorting packages by their short description in a list
> 
> Yes, but it's ingrammaticalous.  Why would you ever sort packages by their
> short description, anyway?


Please note that the "the point is" above is my interpretation of the
rationale. I actually didn't write that part of the devref
anyway..:-)..I happen to just find it makes sense to not have a huge
pile of descriptions that all start the same way.

DevRef suggest that synopsis should be read mentally by prepending
them with "The package  is..." of "The package 
provides...".

Omitting articles is also a way to (slightly) shorten down these
descriptions.

-- 




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Steve Langasek]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 04:58:33PM +, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> > > -leading article, which goes against most of the recommendations for
> > >  synopsis (for instance, in package descritpions)

> > Where are these recommendations and where can I file a bug on them?

> DevRef 6.2.2

> The point is avoiding to have a huge list at "A(n)" and "The" when
> sorting packages by their short description in a list

Yes, but it's ingrammaticalous.  Why would you ever sort packages by their
short description, anyway?

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Christian Perrier]

Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> > -leading article, which goes against most of the recommendations for
> >  synopsis (for instance, in package descritpions)
> 
> Where are these recommendations and where can I file a bug on them?


DevRef 6.2.2

The point is avoiding to have a huge list at "A(n)" and "The" when
sorting packages by their short description in a list

> 
> > That would lead to:
> > 
> > Description: Minimal (non-graphical) core operating environment
> 
> This is a sentence fragment; why should it have a leading capital letter, is
> that consistent with other task descriptions?

It should not have a leading capital. That's a mistake of mine.




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Eddy Petrișor]

On 24/11/2007, Per Olofsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christian Perrier wrote:
> > Quoting Eddy Petri?or ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> >
> >>> -Description: Standard system
> >>> +Description: Command-line environment
> >> I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
> >> installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). 
> >> This
> >> change would make it a lot clearer what's what.
> >
> > I tend to agree. However, that could be "Standard command-line
> > environment" or maybe even "Standard command-line-only environment"
> > (but I don't like the pile of hyphens).
>
> Some of the packages in the standard seem to not be so "command-line-only"
> oriented. For example, SELinux, openssh-client, NFS client, mime-support,
> ispell, doc-debian, procmail, and so on. These could very well be used in a
> GUI-only environment too.

Indeed, but that's what "standard ... environment" includes.

Is there something terribly with "Standard console-only
environment"/"Standard console environment"? To me, this does not
appear to be opposed a "Graphical environment". What do people think?

-- 
Regards,
EddyP
=
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Frans Pop]

On Monday 26 November 2007, Frans Pop wrote:
> I'd prefer to go back to using "standard":
>   Description: Standard (non-graphical) basic operating environment

Hmmm. Isn't the short description also what is shown during pkgsel in D-I?

In that case I don't really feel this change is suitable because:
- it's too long for a multiselect dialog (52 chars)
- it does not really fit in with other task descriptions displayed there


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Steve Langasek]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 05:39:39AM +, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> >  Description: A minimal, (currently non-graphical) core operating 
> > environment
> >   This is the subset of Debian installed by default, which can be added 
> >upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system.

> I like that one, with three minor glitches:

> -leading article, which goes against most of the recommendations for
>  synopsis (for instance, in package descritpions)

Where are these recommendations and where can I file a bug on them?

> That would lead to:
> 
> Description: Minimal (non-graphical) core operating environment

This is a sentence fragment; why should it have a leading capital letter, is
that consistent with other task descriptions?

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Frans Pop]

On Monday 26 November 2007, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Description: Minimal (non-graphical) core operating environment
>  This is the subset of Debian, installed by default, which can be added
>   upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system.

Problem is that it is not really "minimal core". You can get quite a bit 
more minimal and core than having standard packages installed.

I'd prefer to go back to using "standard":
  Description: Standard (non-graphical) basic operating environment

Should "subset of Debian" maybe be "subset of Debian packages" or "subset of 
the Debian distribution"?

Not sure if "added upon" is really correct in this context. I'd probably 
use "extended" instead.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Christian Perrier]

Quoting Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

>  Description: A minimal, (currently non-graphical) core operating environment
>   This is the subset of Debian installed by default, which can be added 
>upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system.


I like that one, with three minor glitches:

-leading article, which goes against most of the recommendations for
 synopsis (for instance, in package descritpions)

- 'currently' which puts an hypothetical moment where that one could
be graphical, which is speculation. Removing it does not really remove
information and mat shorten the description enough

- adding a comma after 'Debian', as pointed by Praveen

That would lead to:

Description: Minimal (non-graphical) core operating environment
 This is the subset of Debian, installed by default, which can be added 
  upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system.





signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Praveen A]

2007/11/25, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>  Description: A minimal, (currently non-graphical) core operating environment
>   This is the subset of Debian installed by default, which can be added
>upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system.

Does adding a coma after Debian makes it clearer?

This is the subset of Debian, installed by default, which can be added
upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system.

or

This is the subset of Debian, installed by default, which provides
basic functionality. Packages can be added later to make it more
featureful and tailored system.

Cheers
Praveen
-- 
പ്രവീണ് അരിമ്പ്രത്തൊടിയില്
Join The DRM Elimination Crew Now!
http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Anti-DRM-Campaign

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Manoj Srivastava]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gmane.linux.debian.devel.boot as well.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 07:42:46 + (GMT), Chris Bell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:  

> Standard system without desktop?

Well, to me this implies there should be a "Standard system with
 desktop" as well.  And the underlying criteria of standard is not
 necessarily to exclude a desktop -- just that currently, X and a
 Desktop environment are too big and cumbersome to be deemed suitable
 for installation by default on _all_ Debian machines; but this may well
 change in a few years.

What we install by default is arrived at by complex series of
 trade-offs; but I am pretty sure it is size of the isntall, and perhaps
 security considerations that drive the trade-offs, not where or not the
 functionality is command line driven, or not.  So standard ahs to be
 small, useful for most of the installations, and not contain large
 chunks that are not of use to a "large" segment of the user base (to
 sit there gathering potential security bugs and offer nothing useful in
 return for these users), and probably other criteria I might be
 missing.

The trick is to convey all that in one line :-)

manoj
-- 
rugged, adj.: Too heavy to lift.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Manoj Srivastava]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gmane.linux.debian.devel.boot as well.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 07:24:00 +, Christian Perrier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:  

> Quoting Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

>> > Any suggestions as to which an accurate description would be?
>> 
>> Description: A minimal, core operating environment "A minimal, core,
>> operating system, nominally installed by default, which can be added
>> upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system."

> I like that one, except maybe that it still doesn't really says that
> there will be nothing like a GUI installed. At the beginning of this
> thread, the point was saying that for most users, "a minimal operating
> system" is pretty likely to implicitely mean something with a GUI (
> whether they're wrong or not is not really relevant, indeed).

I think the fact that we have no gui in standard is merely
 happenstance; X is huge and not minimal, at least from a old UNIX
 user's standpoint.

In the future, as disk sizes and data transfer speeds increase,
 I can see us putting X (and, if one may dream, emacs) into the standard
 install -- and so, perhaps, the gui-ness or not should not be encoded
 into the description.

On the other hand, since most people are not old unix hands, we
 should present a description that does what it needs to, for our
 current audience:

 Description: A minimal, (currently non-graphical) core operating environment
  This is the subset of Debian installed by default, which can be added 
   upon to provide a more featureful and tailored operating system.


manoj
-- 
You will never amount to much. Munich Schoolmaster, to Albert Einstein,
age 10
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Chris Bell]

On Sun 25 Nov, Robert Millan wrote:
> 

> > 
> > Anyway, the description is not accurate. Standard includes everything
> > from documentation about Debian to a MTA to core localisation support,
> > to core SE linux support, to a portmapper (for NFS mounts), none of
> > which has much to do with the command line.
> 
> Any suggestions as to which an accurate description would be?
> 
> -- 
> Robert Millan
> 
Standard system without desktop?



-- 
Chris Bell




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Christian Perrier]

CC'ing Manoj and bringing the topic back to the BTS. Sorry, Manoj, if
you're subscribed to -boot and don't need the CC... When topics fall
in a mailing list because the ML is the place where bug reports land,
one never knos what to do:)

Quoting Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> > Any suggestions as to which an accurate description would be?
> 
>  Description: A minimal, core operating environment
> "A minimal, core, operating system, nominally installed by
>  default,  which can be added upon to provide a more featureful and
>  tailored operating system."

I like that one, except maybe that it still doesn't really says that
there will be nothing like a GUI installed. At the beginning of this
thread, the point was saying that for most users, "a minimal operating
system" is pretty likely to implicitely mean something with a GUI (
whether they're wrong or not is not really relevant, indeed).

Anyway, the problem is *also* that, IIRC, the description of a task
has to be short enough to fit "on one line".




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Robert Millan]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 07:16:48AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 09:26:12AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Eddy Petrișor wrote:
> > > > -Description: Standard system
> > > > +Description: Command-line environment
> > > 
> > > I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
> > > installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). 
> > > This
> > > change would make it a lot clearer what's what.
> > 
> > Resulting in people de-selecting standard if they choose desktop. Which
> > is not what we want.
> > 
> > Anyway, the description is not accurate. Standard includes everything
> > from documentation about Debian to a MTA to core localisation support,
> > to core SE linux support, to a portmapper (for NFS mounts), none of
> > which has much to do with the command line.
> 
> Any suggestions as to which an accurate description would be?

Or, perhaps we could find a way to distinguish cmdline-only packages, and
make two tasks out of it?  Policy requires that they're installed by default,
but that doesn't mean they must be a single task.

-- 
Robert Millan

 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
 What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Robert Millan]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 09:26:12AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Eddy Petrișor wrote:
> > > -Description: Standard system
> > > +Description: Command-line environment
> > 
> > I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
> > installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). 
> > This
> > change would make it a lot clearer what's what.
> 
> Resulting in people de-selecting standard if they choose desktop. Which
> is not what we want.
> 
> Anyway, the description is not accurate. Standard includes everything
> from documentation about Debian to a MTA to core localisation support,
> to core SE linux support, to a portmapper (for NFS mounts), none of
> which has much to do with the command line.

Any suggestions as to which an accurate description would be?

-- 
Robert Millan

 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
 What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Robert Millan]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 09:43:04PM +, Christian Perrier wrote:
> 
> Sure, describing this as "command-line" is certainly restirctive but
> we might need to focus on what we want to day:
> 
> - this task should be installed on nearly any system except those that
>   are really short on disk space

The most significant resource it consumes is not disk space, but boot time
and overall memory usage.

-- 
Robert Millan

 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
 What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Christian Perrier]

Quoting Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Eddy Petri?or wrote:
> > > -Description: Standard system
> > > +Description: Command-line environment
> > 
> > I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
> > installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). 
> > This
> > change would make it a lot clearer what's what.
> 
> Resulting in people de-selecting standard if they choose desktop. Which
> is not what we want.

You get a point here.

> 
> Anyway, the description is not accurate. Standard includes everything
> from documentation about Debian to a MTA to core localisation support,
> to core SE linux support, to a portmapper (for NFS mounts), none of
> which has much to do with the command line.


Sure, describing this as "command-line" is certainly restirctive but
we might need to focus on what we want to day:

- this task should be installed on nearly any system except those that
  are really short on disk space
- it does not bring a graphical environment

Anyone seeing something else to add that would describe the standard
system?




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Joey Hess]

Eddy Petrișor wrote:
> > -Description: Standard system
> > +Description: Command-line environment
> 
> I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
> installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). This
> change would make it a lot clearer what's what.

Resulting in people de-selecting standard if they choose desktop. Which
is not what we want.

Anyway, the description is not accurate. Standard includes everything
from documentation about Debian to a MTA to core localisation support,
to core SE linux support, to a portmapper (for NFS mounts), none of
which has much to do with the command line.

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Per Olofsson]

Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Eddy Petri?or ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> 
>>> -Description: Standard system
>>> +Description: Command-line environment
>> I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
>> installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). This
>> change would make it a lot clearer what's what.
> 
> I tend to agree. However, that could be "Standard command-line
> environment" or maybe even "Standard command-line-only environment"
> (but I don't like the pile of hyphens).

Some of the packages in the standard seem to not be so "command-line-only"
oriented. For example, SELinux, openssh-client, NFS client, mime-support,
ispell, doc-debian, procmail, and so on. These could very well be used in a
GUI-only environment too.

-- 
Pelle



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Eddy Petrișor]

Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Eddy Petri?or ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> 
>>> -Description: Standard system
>>> +Description: Command-line environment
>> I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
>> installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). This
>> change would make it a lot clearer what's what.
> 
> 
> I tend to agree. However, that could be "Standard command-line
> environment" or maybe even "Standard command-line-only environment"
> (but I don't like the pile of hyphens).

Yes, "Standard command-line environment" seems saner. OTOH, the
over-hyphenated-second-proposal seems to add no value and looks like frenglish
to me ;-) .

-- 
Regards,
EddyP
=
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Robert Millan]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 06:31:53AM +, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Eddy Petri?or ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> 
> > > -Description: Standard system
> > > +Description: Command-line environment
> > 
> > I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
> > installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). 
> > This
> > change would make it a lot clearer what's what.
> 
> 
> I tend to agree. However, that could be "Standard command-line
> environment" or maybe even "Standard command-line-only environment"
> (but I don't like the pile of hyphens).

Keeping "Standard" in the phrase seems fine to me, but I don't think the
"-only" would add any meaning (If you mean "only" in the context of all
the tasks, adding one more task makes it false.  If you mean "only" in the
context if this task, then it just means that the task doesn't add anything
other than what it claims to add, which should be obvious).

-- 
Robert Millan

 I know my rights; I want my phone call!
 What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Christian Perrier]

Quoting Eddy Petri?or ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> > -Description: Standard system
> > +Description: Command-line environment
> 
> I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
> installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). This
> change would make it a lot clearer what's what.


I tend to agree. However, that could be "Standard command-line
environment" or maybe even "Standard command-line-only environment"
(but I don't like the pile of hyphens).



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Eddy Petrișor]

> Policy describes the "standard" priority level as:
> 
>   "These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited 
> character-mode
>system. This is what will be installed by default if the user doesn't 
> select
>anything else. It doesn't include many large applications."
> 
> which means that in the context of Policy s.2.5, the word "standard" implies
> command-line interface.  However, word has it that some of our users (those
> heretics! :-)) haven't studied Policy throughtfuly, and might think that
> "standard" means something like "must-have" [1].

> --- tasksel-2.70/tasks/standard~2007-10-20 03:32:28.0 +0200
> +++ tasksel-2.70/tasks/standard 2007-11-22 15:08:43.0 +0100
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>  Task: standard
>  Section: user
> -Description: Standard system
> +Description: Command-line environment

I agree with Robert; I have been asked quite a few times by friends (while
installing, what is the difference between standard and desktop system). This
change would make it a lot clearer what's what.

-- 
Regards,
EddyP
=
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#452388: "Standard system" is confusing

[Robert Millan]

Package: tasksel
Version: 2.70
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch

Policy describes the "standard" priority level as:

  "These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited character-mode
   system. This is what will be installed by default if the user doesn't select
   anything else. It doesn't include many large applications."

which means that in the context of Policy s.2.5, the word "standard" implies
command-line interface.  However, word has it that some of our users (those
heretics! :-)) haven't studied Policy throughtfuly, and might think that
"standard" means something like "must-have" [1].

... which obviously it isn't when you're setting up a GUI-only system for a
command-line-impaired user (or even, when the user himself is).  In that case
you'll most likely want to avoid this task completely, specially since it
contains packages (at, exim4, nfs-common, portmap) that launch system daemons,
increasing boot time and overall memory usage.

I would suggest:

--- tasksel-2.70/tasks/standard~2007-10-20 03:32:28.0 +0200
+++ tasksel-2.70/tasks/standard 2007-11-22 15:08:43.0 +0100
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Task: standard
 Section: user
-Description: Standard system
+Description: Command-line environment
  This task installs a reasonably small character-mode system.
 Packages: standard
 Test-new-install: mark skip

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-5-amd64
Locale: LANG=ca_AD.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=ca_AD.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]