Op woensdag 14-05-2008 om 21:13 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Dylan McCall: > I think, on the usability front, a nice thing with > GNOME (and Ubuntu by extension) is not belittling the user. That is, > never presenting information the user does not know about and then > telling him to just ignore it because "it means nothing to him". If > information means nothing to the user, it should not be waved under his > nose. If it does mean something to the user, it should be presented > clearly. The result: Users get used to reading what is on screen instead > of frantically avoiding scary technical information. [...] > Still, it seems odd to me that openssh-client, openssh-server and > openssl would all be saying essentially the same thing with varying > levels of complexity.
The fixes & changes have different results in different situations. I think, because of that, it's difficult to do this 100% right... (E.g. server admins vs. home users.) > What I am really concerned about here is how capable our existing > infrastructure for major security updates is of being user friendly. I > suppose the update script wanted me to run that command myself since it > is running as root (so it would be bad for it to do that), which does > expose some problems: Here an updater that needs to change something for > a user is giving the user instructions that it should seemingly be able > to follow itself. The update script is already running as root. The given command had to be run *before* logging on again anyway, as it shows the new SSH host (= server) key's fingerprint that you need to make sure you're logging on into the right server. > Furthermore, good Vulcan logic dictates that critical security > updates > should not be slowed down for the sake of usability review. Which is probably why things weren't as good as they "should" be... ;-) -- Jan Claeys -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
