refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update. Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux *kernel version here*).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:07:59 +0300 Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update. Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux *kernel version here*).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
first of all, I do *not* speak for the design team, just stating my opinion.
The intended design is probably best what we can have but, * Given the fedora target audience, it's not uncommon to have multiple fedoras installed, so it would be good if the items looked like Fedora $REL_VER$ $REL_NAME$ (or without the release name). * All kernels should be in subdirectory. That the current kernel updates break the intended setup (as set-up in /etc) is obviously incorrect and should be fixed. Both ways (submenus or direct menu) are better than current state of things. * I do not seem to see any theme, even though there's obviously the beefy-miracle one installed. It's probably missing in configs (/etc/grub.d/) though -- my issue, or a general one?
Cheers, Martin
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure out some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should just say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
~m
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure out some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should just say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed.
~m
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
1) Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different kernel? Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it." 2) It should just be "Fedora". 3) I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or without the theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
EOF
Dan On Jun 19, 2012 1:07 AM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure out some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should just say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed.
~m
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa. _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
- Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different kernel?
Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files.
- It should just be "Fedora".
Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number
- I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or without the
theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
Well, I like how it looks with the theme, but if you don't like it you could always make your own theme to make it look like you want, or talk with upstream grub and explain to them why you think the default doesn't look good.
EOF
Dan On Jun 19, 2012 1:07 AM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure out some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should just say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed.
~m
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa. _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Quote: "Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files."
If you wanted to make it easier for "novice users" then why do novice users have to do so much work out of the box to get stuff working? This is such a minor fix for "novice users".
"Novice users" use Ubuntu. Think about why. I understand that Ubuntu and Fedora have different "religious" philosophies but this is reality without getting too in the the actual "religion" of FOSS and the 4 foundations of Fedora.
Quote "Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number"
So a "novice user" would have Rawhide installed? :)
A novice user just wants it to "work" "out of the box".
I mean it's really that simple.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Elad Alfassa elad@fedoraproject.orgwrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
- Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different kernel?
Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files.
- It should just be "Fedora".
Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number
- I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or without
the theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
Well, I like how it looks with the theme, but if you don't like it you could always make your own theme to make it look like you want, or talk with upstream grub and explain to them why you think the default doesn't look good.
EOF
Dan On Jun 19, 2012 1:07 AM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure out some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should just say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed.
~m
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa. _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
To further add to my previous email, don't forget about your core user base. Since you are aiming for the "novice user" what happens to the "expert/intermediate user base"?
Do you just neglect them and they just accept all the changes you make in order to make Fedora more "Novice friendly"?
So what happens to the guy that's been doing things the way it's been done for 10+ years and you change it on him and he has to relearn everything all over again?
You now just turned and intermediate/expert user into a novice user. I find that counterproductive.
Just shedding a different way of thinking on the matter. I respect everyone's contributions I'm just making my own personal opinion and voice heard since that what is so awesome about this community is that I can say how I feel and contribute my opinion while it may not be taken as "Oh my god this guy is so right what were we thinking?" it's definitely something to think about.
Thanks, Dan
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Quote: "Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly.
Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files."
If you wanted to make it easier for "novice users" then why do novice users have to do so much work out of the box to get stuff working? This is such a minor fix for "novice users".
"Novice users" use Ubuntu. Think about why. I understand that Ubuntu and Fedora have different "religious" philosophies but this is reality without getting too in the the actual "religion" of FOSS and the 4 foundations of Fedora.
Quote "Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed?
I think it should be Fedora $number"
So a "novice user" would have Rawhide installed? :)
A novice user just wants it to "work" "out of the box".
I mean it's really that simple.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Elad Alfassa elad@fedoraproject.orgwrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
- Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different kernel?
Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files.
- It should just be "Fedora".
Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number
- I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or without
the theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
Well, I like how it looks with the theme, but if you don't like it you could always make your own theme to make it look like you want, or talk with upstream grub and explain to them why you think the default doesn't look good.
EOF
Dan On Jun 19, 2012 1:07 AM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure
out
some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should
just
say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed.
~m
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa. _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
To further add to my previous email, don't forget about your core user base. Since you are aiming for the "novice user" what happens to the "expert/intermediate user base"?
Do you just neglect them and they just accept all the changes you make in order to make Fedora more "Novice friendly"?
So what happens to the guy that's been doing things the way it's been done for 10+ years and you change it on him and he has to relearn everything all over again?
You now just turned and intermediate/expert user into a novice user. I find that counterproductive.
Oh really? I don't see how having a submenu for older kernel versions will make expert users need to "relearn" anything.
Just shedding a different way of thinking on the matter. I respect everyone's contributions I'm just making my own personal opinion and voice heard since that what is so awesome about this community is that I can say how I feel and contribute my opinion while it may not be taken as "Oh my god this guy is so right what were we thinking?" it's definitely something to think about.
Thanks, Dan
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Quote: "Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly.
Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files."
If you wanted to make it easier for "novice users" then why do novice users have to do so much work out of the box to get stuff working? This is such a minor fix for "novice users".
"Novice users" use Ubuntu. Think about why. I understand that Ubuntu and Fedora have different "religious" philosophies but this is reality without getting too in the the actual "religion" of FOSS and the 4 foundations of Fedora.
Quote "Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed?
I think it should be Fedora $number"
So a "novice user" would have Rawhide installed? :)
A novice user just wants it to "work" "out of the box".
I mean it's really that simple.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Elad Alfassa elad@fedoraproject.orgwrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.comwrote:
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
- Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different kernel?
Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files.
- It should just be "Fedora".
Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number
- I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or without
the theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
Well, I like how it looks with the theme, but if you don't like it you could always make your own theme to make it look like you want, or talk with upstream grub and explain to them why you think the default doesn't look good.
EOF
Dan On Jun 19, 2012 1:07 AM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy < duffy@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote: > refer to this thread in -devel: >
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
> > As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in > the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you > run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure
out
some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
> Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called > Fedora. > It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
> What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should
just
say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed.
~m
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa. _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
I'm thinking of the bigger picture besides this submenu. Again, without literally watching every single dev change and being on the QA team how am I supposed to know everything that's changed.
"Oh btw in Fedora 18 you have to go to advanced boot options to boot an older kernel now. Yeah I know, we've been able to do this for 20 years now since the dawn of time but they think it's better for novice users this way."
Just 1 example of many things. You can't expect Fedora to be a distro that you can really settle and get "used to" when it's constantly changing.
I know this is the whole point of the whole distro, to be "bleeding edge" and have the latest technologies in our awesome distro.
Again, I go with a "If it aint broke don't fix it" mentality into things.
In my daily life I'm a sysadmin. Figuring out how to do something on RHEL 5 vs RHEL 6 vs CentOS 5 vs CentOS 6 vs Fedora 13 Fedora 14 Fedora 15 Fedora 16 Fedora 17 Fedora 18 and what's different between each and every single one is annoying in every day life at work.
"Oh yeah so dude on Fedora 17 they moved to systemd. That service command doesn't work the same way and neither does chkconfig either anymore. Sorry bro deal with it."
Dan
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Elad Alfassa elad@fedoraproject.orgwrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
To further add to my previous email, don't forget about your core user base. Since you are aiming for the "novice user" what happens to the "expert/intermediate user base"?
Do you just neglect them and they just accept all the changes you make in order to make Fedora more "Novice friendly"?
So what happens to the guy that's been doing things the way it's been done for 10+ years and you change it on him and he has to relearn everything all over again?
You now just turned and intermediate/expert user into a novice user. I find that counterproductive.
Oh really? I don't see how having a submenu for older kernel versions will make expert users need to "relearn" anything.
Just shedding a different way of thinking on the matter. I respect everyone's contributions I'm just making my own personal opinion and voice heard since that what is so awesome about this community is that I can say how I feel and contribute my opinion while it may not be taken as "Oh my god this guy is so right what were we thinking?" it's definitely something to think about.
Thanks, Dan
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.comwrote:
Quote: "Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly.
Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files."
If you wanted to make it easier for "novice users" then why do novice users have to do so much work out of the box to get stuff working? This is such a minor fix for "novice users".
"Novice users" use Ubuntu. Think about why. I understand that Ubuntu and Fedora have different "religious" philosophies but this is reality without getting too in the the actual "religion" of FOSS and the 4 foundations of Fedora.
Quote "Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed?
I think it should be Fedora $number"
So a "novice user" would have Rawhide installed? :)
A novice user just wants it to "work" "out of the box".
I mean it's really that simple.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Elad Alfassa elad@fedoraproject.orgwrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.comwrote:
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
- Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different
kernel? Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files.
- It should just be "Fedora".
Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number
- I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or without
the theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
Well, I like how it looks with the theme, but if you don't like it you could always make your own theme to make it look like you want, or talk with upstream grub and explain to them why you think the default doesn't look good.
EOF
Dan On Jun 19, 2012 1:07 AM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy < duffy@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > Hi Elad, > > On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote: >> refer to this thread in -devel: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html >> >> As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in >> the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you >> run a kernel update. > > Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get > together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure out > some way to have older kernels go under the submenu. > >> Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called >> Fedora. >> It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here). > >> What is the stand of the design team on this? > > Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe > Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the > kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand > correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should just > say Fedora. Is that too extreme? Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed. > > ~m > > > _______________________________________________ > design-team mailing list > design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa. _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:40:38 -0700 Dan Mashal wrote:
Again, I go with a "If it aint broke don't fix it" mentality into things.
In my daily life I'm a sysadmin. Figuring out how to do something on RHEL 5 vs RHEL 6 vs CentOS 5 vs CentOS 6 vs Fedora 13 Fedora 14 Fedora 15 Fedora 16 Fedora 17 Fedora 18 and what's different between each and every single one is annoying in every day life at work.
Yeah, it is annoying, but rejecting a change *only* because it is change isn't a strong argument. With such reasoning there wouldn't be PCs in the first place (and btw. steam engine also works, doesn't it, yet trains are now using diesel, if they are not using electricity)... Still I think the changes between Fedora/Red Hat releases are small compared to differences between Fedora/Debian/(Open)Suse or between various M$ operating systems... So either deal with it or decrease the number of concurrently "supported" releases to sane number.
You know, people who use Fedora (especially those that contribute) often multi-boot and, frankly, menu like the following one (the kernel versions are semi-random picks of sane numbers out of my head) isn't exactly helpful: * Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc17) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc17) * Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc16) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc16) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc16) * CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.4-35.el5) * CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.3-30.el5) * CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.2-21.el5) * Microsoft Windows * Memtest
IMHO it is broken and always was (at the very least it always annoyed the hell out of me that fedora release number wasn't present). But still, currently it is more broken, because grub2-mkconfig writes sub-menued items, while kernel rpm updates grub2 still using the above method, which leads to combination of sub-menus and non-sub-menued items...
Cheers, Martin
I use VMs so I don't multi boot. I bypass this problem completely.
In regards to your quote:
"Yeah, it is annoying, but rejecting a change *only* because it is change isn't a strong argument. With such reasoning there wouldn't be PCs in the first place (and btw. steam engine also works, doesn't it, yet trains are now using diesel, if they are not using electricity)... Still I think the changes between Fedora/Red Hat releases are small compared to differences between Fedora/Debian/(Open)Suse or between various M$ operating systems... So either deal with it or decrease the number of concurrently "supported" releases to sane number.
You know, people who use Fedora (especially those that contribute) often multi-boot and, frankly, menu like the following one (the kernel versions are semi-random picks of sane numbers out of my head) isn't exactly helpful: * Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc17) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc17) * Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc16) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc16) * Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc16) * CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.4-35.el5) * CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.3-30.el5) * CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.2-21.el5) * Microsoft Windows * Memtest"
I am a Fedora Packager, QA/Bug-triager, ambassador, and hopefully soon to be future design team member. I've been running Linux since 2.0.26. These are just my opinions. Do what you will. I have seen nothing but refutation from your side at this point.
fasaccount: vicodan package maintained: BitchX
Thanks, Dan
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:00 AM, Martin Sourada martin.sourada@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:40:38 -0700 Dan Mashal wrote:
Again, I go with a "If it aint broke don't fix it" mentality into things.
In my daily life I'm a sysadmin. Figuring out how to do something on RHEL 5 vs RHEL 6 vs CentOS 5 vs CentOS 6 vs Fedora 13 Fedora 14 Fedora 15 Fedora 16 Fedora 17 Fedora 18 and what's different between each and every single one is annoying in every day life at work.
Yeah, it is annoying, but rejecting a change *only* because it is change isn't a strong argument. With such reasoning there wouldn't be PCs in the first place (and btw. steam engine also works, doesn't it, yet trains are now using diesel, if they are not using electricity)... Still I think the changes between Fedora/Red Hat releases are small compared to differences between Fedora/Debian/(Open)Suse or between various M$ operating systems... So either deal with it or decrease the number of concurrently "supported" releases to sane number.
You know, people who use Fedora (especially those that contribute) often multi-boot and, frankly, menu like the following one (the kernel versions are semi-random picks of sane numbers out of my head) isn't exactly helpful:
- Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc16)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc16)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc16)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.4-35.el5)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.3-30.el5)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.2-21.el5)
- Microsoft Windows
- Memtest
IMHO it is broken and always was (at the very least it always annoyed the hell out of me that fedora release number wasn't present). But still, currently it is more broken, because grub2-mkconfig writes sub-menued items, while kernel rpm updates grub2 still using the above method, which leads to combination of sub-menus and non-sub-menued items...
Cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle)
*Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16)
*Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Happy to hear thoughts on this approach.
Kirk
On 06/20/2012 02:00 AM, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:40:38 -0700 Dan Mashal wrote:
Again, I go with a "If it aint broke don't fix it" mentality into things.
In my daily life I'm a sysadmin. Figuring out how to do something on RHEL 5 vs RHEL 6 vs CentOS 5 vs CentOS 6 vs Fedora 13 Fedora 14 Fedora 15 Fedora 16 Fedora 17 Fedora 18 and what's different between each and every single one is annoying in every day life at work.
Yeah, it is annoying, but rejecting a change *only* because it is change isn't a strong argument. With such reasoning there wouldn't be PCs in the first place (and btw. steam engine also works, doesn't it, yet trains are now using diesel, if they are not using electricity)... Still I think the changes between Fedora/Red Hat releases are small compared to differences between Fedora/Debian/(Open)Suse or between various M$ operating systems... So either deal with it or decrease the number of concurrently "supported" releases to sane number.
You know, people who use Fedora (especially those that contribute) often multi-boot and, frankly, menu like the following one (the kernel versions are semi-random picks of sane numbers out of my head) isn't exactly helpful:
- Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc16)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc16)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc16)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.4-35.el5)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.3-30.el5)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.2-21.el5)
- Microsoft Windows
- Memtest
IMHO it is broken and always was (at the very least it always annoyed the hell out of me that fedora release number wasn't present). But still, currently it is more broken, because grub2-mkconfig writes sub-menued items, while kernel rpm updates grub2 still using the above method, which leads to combination of sub-menus and non-sub-menued items...
Cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
+1 On Jun 20, 2012 8:03 AM, "Kirk Bridger" kirk@thebside.ca wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7Happy to hear thoughts on this approach.
Kirk
On 06/20/2012 02:00 AM, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:40:38 -0700 Dan Mashal wrote:
Again, I go with a "If it aint broke don't fix it" mentality into things.
In my daily life I'm a sysadmin. Figuring out how to do something on RHEL 5 vs RHEL 6 vs CentOS 5 vs CentOS 6 vs Fedora 13 Fedora 14 Fedora 15 Fedora 16 Fedora 17 Fedora 18 and what's different between each and every single one is annoying in every day life at work.
Yeah, it is annoying, but rejecting a change *only* because it is change isn't a strong argument. With such reasoning there wouldn't be PCs in the first place (and btw. steam engine also works, doesn't it, yet trains are now using diesel, if they are not using electricity)... Still I think the changes between Fedora/Red Hat releases are small compared to differences between Fedora/Debian/(Open)Suse or between various M$ operating systems... So either deal with it or decrease the number of concurrently "supported" releases to sane number.
You know, people who use Fedora (especially those that contribute) often multi-boot and, frankly, menu like the following one (the kernel versions are semi-random picks of sane numbers out of my head) isn't exactly helpful:
- Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc17)
- Fedora (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc16)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-46.fc16)
- Fedora (kernel-3.5.7-42.fc16)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.4-35.el5)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.3-30.el5)
- CentOS (kernel-2.16.31.2-21.el5)
- Microsoft Windows
- Memtest
IMHO it is broken and always was (at the very least it always annoyed the hell out of me that fedora release number wasn't present). But still, currently it is more broken, because grub2-mkconfig writes sub-menued items, while kernel rpm updates grub2 still using the above method, which leads to combination of sub-menus and non-sub-menued items...
Cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing listdesign-team@lists.fedoraproject.orghttps://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7
IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though: * Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating systems (*if* they use different root). * Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading) * Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
1. Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac) ============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
2. *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters ============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
3. Massive virtualization ========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
---------------------------------------------------- Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
* Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18) * Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17) * Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23) * Microsoft Windows 7 -------- * Fedora Rawhide (Rescue) - older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s) * Fedora 17 (Rescue) - older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s) * Debian 6.0 (Rescue) - older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s) * Microsoft Windows 7 - if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
----------------------------------------------------
THanks, Martin
+20
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 21:39 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating systems (*if* they use different root).
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
THanks, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Thinking about it like this makes more sense. On Jun 20, 2012 12:56 PM, "Onyeibo Oku" twohotis@gmail.com wrote:
** +20
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 21:39 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating systems (*if* they use different root).
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
THanks, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing listdesign-team@lists.fedoraproject.orghttps://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
However, keep one thing in mind. It already automagically selects the lates Fedora kernel without user intervention, Martin. ;) On Jun 20, 2012 12:39 PM, "Martin Sourada" martin.sourada@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating
systems (*if* they use different root).
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already
running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating
systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however
if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
THanks, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
I do not like this approach, way too much clutter.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
However, keep one thing in mind. It already automagically selects the lates Fedora kernel without user intervention, Martin. ;) On Jun 20, 2012 12:39 PM, "Martin Sourada" martin.sourada@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating
systems (*if* they use different root).
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already
running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating
systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however
if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
THanks, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Then maybe we should have a vote on it just like we did with release names? Maybe we should do more voting on more major changes? Maybe we should make it a full democracy instead of the engineering team decides is "better for the novice user" when they don't even communicate with the novice user.
Dan On Jun 20, 2012 1:12 PM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I do not like this approach, way too much clutter.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
However, keep one thing in mind. It already automagically selects the lates Fedora kernel without user intervention, Martin. ;) On Jun 20, 2012 12:39 PM, "Martin Sourada" martin.sourada@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating
systems (*if* they use different root).
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already
running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating
systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however
if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
THanks, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
if we were to vote on every single change we would never get any work done. this is not important enough for a vote.
and, if you think everything should be up for a vote, what is the point in having a design team, or fesco, or even the board? the simple answer is having every fedora contributor to vote on every decision is not ralistic and counter-productive.
sent from a mobile device so please excuse spelling mistakes. On Jun 20, 2012 11:28 PM, "Dan Mashal" dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Then maybe we should have a vote on it just like we did with release names? Maybe we should do more voting on more major changes? Maybe we should make it a full democracy instead of the engineering team decides is "better for the novice user" when they don't even communicate with the novice user.
Dan On Jun 20, 2012 1:12 PM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I do not like this approach, way too much clutter.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.comwrote:
However, keep one thing in mind. It already automagically selects the lates Fedora kernel without user intervention, Martin. ;) On Jun 20, 2012 12:39 PM, "Martin Sourada" martin.sourada@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating
systems (*if* they use different root).
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already
running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating
systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however
if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
THanks, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Fair enough.
Points have been made. On Jun 20, 2012 2:34 PM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
if we were to vote on every single change we would never get any work done. this is not important enough for a vote.
and, if you think everything should be up for a vote, what is the point in having a design team, or fesco, or even the board? the simple answer is having every fedora contributor to vote on every decision is not ralistic and counter-productive.
sent from a mobile device so please excuse spelling mistakes. On Jun 20, 2012 11:28 PM, "Dan Mashal" dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Then maybe we should have a vote on it just like we did with release names? Maybe we should do more voting on more major changes? Maybe we should make it a full democracy instead of the engineering team decides is "better for the novice user" when they don't even communicate with the novice user.
Dan On Jun 20, 2012 1:12 PM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I do not like this approach, way too much clutter.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.comwrote:
However, keep one thing in mind. It already automagically selects the lates Fedora kernel without user intervention, Martin. ;) On Jun 20, 2012 12:39 PM, "Martin Sourada" martin.sourada@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:03:35 -0700 Kirk Bridger wrote:
Perhaps we can put some additional solution ideas forward.
As a quasi-novice kernel user I always found it helpful to have the kernel versions visible. When I update Fedora and the nvidia blob causes X to fail, I like being able to choose older versions because I can't do anything else. When a pre-upgrade ends up with a non-working version, I like to be able to run an older version to stay productive while I research the problem.
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to *hide* the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) *Current Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) * Superceded Versions* Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) *Other Operating Systems* Microsoft Windows 7IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating
systems (*if* they use different root).
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already
running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating
systems?
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special
rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however
if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it would be.
THanks, Martin _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On 2012-06-20 16:27, Dan Mashal wrote:
Then maybe we should have a vote on it just like we did with release names? Maybe we should do more voting on more major changes? Maybe we should make it a full democracy instead of the engineering team decides is "better for the novice user" when they don't even communicate with the novice user.
Dan, I'd like to kindly and respectfully ask that you stop referring to Fedora's target user as a 'novice' user. This is not Fedora's user base. I have pointed this out to you in IRC in a private chat some days/weeks ago and I have pointed this out to you earlier in the thread. Let's not muddy the waters and confuse the conversation by continuing to bring this up, as it's just not reflective of the reality of Fedora's actual user base:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base
Let's try to refer to this more frequently so we can have a more productive / fruitful discussion here, okay?
(BTW the user base was not determined by engineering or FESCO, it is the purview of the Board and they came up with it.)
On your point about voting - we don't vote on decisions like this. We are not elected officials on the design team like the governing bodies of FESCO and FAMSCO and the Fedora Board, so we don't really have authority to vote on decisions like that.
~m
Wow. I can't help but be impressed on the way you reply to every single concern brought up in this chain.
The only reply to you directly I have is in regards to the whole "target user base" thing is that I was just replying to the original mention of it. Never for a minute did I think that.
You are a wealth of information and a great asset to the community.
I appreciate the link to the "user base" wiki.
Thank you.
Dan On Jun 20, 2012 7:24 PM, "Máirín Duffy" duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On 2012-06-20 16:27, Dan Mashal wrote:
Then maybe we should have a vote on it just like we did with release names? Maybe we should do more voting on more major changes? Maybe we should make it a full democracy instead of the engineering team decides is "better for the novice user" when they don't even communicate with the novice user.
Dan, I'd like to kindly and respectfully ask that you stop referring to Fedora's target user as a 'novice' user. This is not Fedora's user base. I have pointed this out to you in IRC in a private chat some days/weeks ago and I have pointed this out to you earlier in the thread. Let's not muddy the waters and confuse the conversation by continuing to bring this up, as it's just not reflective of the reality of Fedora's actual user base:
https://fedoraproject.org/**wiki/User_basehttps://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base
Let's try to refer to this more frequently so we can have a more productive / fruitful discussion here, okay?
(BTW the user base was not determined by engineering or FESCO, it is the purview of the Board and they came up with it.)
On your point about voting - we don't vote on decisions like this. We are not elected officials on the design team like the governing bodies of FESCO and FAMSCO and the Fedora Board, so we don't really have authority to vote on decisions like that.
~m ______________________________**_________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.**fedoraproject.orgdesign-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/design-**teamhttps://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 19:40 -0700, Dan Mashal wrote:
Wow. I can't help but be impressed on the way you reply to every single concern brought up in this chain.
The only reply to you directly I have is in regards to the whole "target user base" thing is that I was just replying to the original mention of it. Never for a minute did I think that.
You are a wealth of information and a great asset to the community.
I appreciate the link to the "user base" wiki.
Thank you.
Dan
+50 :-)
Regards Onyeibo
tl;dr version:
1 - I think data should be collected before we make assumptions about our user base.
2 - I think categorizing is a better solution than hiding, as users with lots of kernels/OSs are more likely to be switching more often, vs users with just a few. The value of reducing clutter is minimized is clutter consists of 3-5 items, and hiding things makes it harder to do what you want to do.
3 - I think removing clutter is a good goal, provided it meets our users needs (see comment #1)
Kirk
On 06/20/2012 12:39 PM, Martin Sourada wrote:
IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating systems (*if* they use different root).
Over my technical head, sorry
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an already running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
I thought that since Fedora 17 is managing the bootloader it could draw it however it liked. Virtual shrug here though as I have no strong feelings either way.
- Why have Fedora stylistically higher priority than other operating systems?
Same reason above. I'm Fedora-centric :)
IMHO, there are multiple different types of users, who use fedora, let's divide them into few different groups.
Keeping in mind this is all best guess or has research been done with the user base to pull these personas together? If not, might be interesting to do a quick survey to find out how many people fall into these categories, or if other categories exist like a single-booter, or would they just fall under the virtualization one? Are there bootloader needs related to virtual machines (don't know)? Could we just label them as single OS booters and forget the whole virtualization thing?
I've tried to pull out a primary need from your description for each category for further discussion.
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
Primary need: boot latest version of multiple OSs Frequency of booting non-default option: only when switching OSs (i.e. rarely boot old versions of an OS)
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
Primary need: boot latest version of multiple OSs Frequency of booting non-default option: when switching OSs and also when choosing old versions (medium frequency)
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
Primary need: boot latest version of OS Frequency of booting non-default option: when latest version fails
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
So looking at it this way, how does hiding old versions help with any of these people in their primary need? I think it is a mechanism to make it easier to find the latest OS versions. Is it the only mechanism? No - we could also group things as I suggested.
*Hiding* Pros: Less visual clutter for persona 1 and 3 (2 may not see it as clutter), emphasizes primary task Cons: Harder for persona 2 to launch old versions, makes it harder to persona 3 to know what to do when latest version fails (i.e. they have to explore the interface to find the options)
*Grouping and labelling* Pros: All options are immediately visible and findable, emphasizes primary task Cons: Persona 2 will have a lot of visual clutter (though they may not see it as clutter)
So in my mind this comes down to a question of hiding the visible clutter or not. I'd suggest that some data here would help. I will also suggest that personas 1 and 3 will not have a lot of visual clutter to see, as how many versions of OSs would they typically have? 1? 3? 5?
So we're hiding this minimal clutter and in the process making it harder for persona 2 to work with their system.
I'm leaning towards grouping/categorizing. Though again this is all without any data on our user base. I'm all for streamlining and making things look elegant, but it seems like at least for the personas above the best solution would be grouping.
Kirk
You got it Kirk. +1
I'm sick of this "let's make fedora better for the novice user" goal when its just made EVERY user's life harder except maybe fesco's I guess....
I don't even feel like giving examples anymore, but there is a growing group of people that are really starting to disagree with the direction we are drifting from the overall standard of Linux itself.
I think some people should read the article on linux.com which ranks the categorizes every distro by advantage/disadvantage.
I.e. Mint won desktops Fedora won "bleeding edge" Ubuntu won "laptop" Redhat won enterprise Backtrack won security.
I remember reading that slackware was named the best vanilla distro.
Sometimes I miss slackware and its simplicity because of things changing every 6 months.
How long ago was Fedora 14 released? Remember how perfect it was? Everything worked great.
I'm ranting at this point so I'm gunna go sit in a jacuzzi.
Dan
Hi Kirk,
On 2012-06-20 19:04, Kirk Bridger wrote:
1 - I think data should be collected before we make assumptions about our user base.
We need to take the user base as defined by the project board as a given:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base
It wasn't determined lightly and it was researched and deliberated and discussed throughout the community pretty carefully.
2 - I think categorizing is a better solution than hiding, as users with lots of kernels/OSs are more likely to be switching more often, vs users with just a few. The value of reducing clutter is minimized is clutter consists of 3-5 items, and hiding things makes it harder to do what you want to do.
Don't forget to consider, along with majority of users vs minority of users, how frequently vs infrequently users will be:
- Switching OSes - Switching kernels
I believe switching OSes is going to be more frequent for even the Pokemon 'gotta catch 'em all' distro enthusiast than switching kernels within each OS, and the mockup that Martin put together definitely optimizes for switching OSes instead of switching kernels. The only user I know of that realistically switches between specific kernels on any kind of frequent basis is a kernel developer, and I haven't seen any complaints or concerns from kernel developers about the change. That being said, I can certainly reach out to a few and get some feedback from them, but I think they probably - since their menu has so many entries anyway - have highly customized grub conf files anyway so any defaults are likely not to affect them.
3 - I think removing clutter is a good goal, provided it meets our users needs (see comment #1)
+99 I'm glad we seem to be all on the same page about this part, we just need to sort out more of the other details.
~m
Hi Máirín,
Thanks for the link to the user base, that's actually new to me (or I've forgotten about it) - a good resource.
I don't see any specific info that would help answer some of the questions we've uncovered in this discussion. It would be great if we could reach out to Fedora users to answer questions such as:
1 - How many operating systems do you typically have installed on your main machine?
2 - How often do you use the ability to boot your machine into older kernels? Other OSs?
3 - What causes you to boot into old kernels?
4 - How often do you select something other than the default in the boot menu (i.e. grub2)
The questions might need some polishing, but those are the ones I can pick off the top of my head. A quick survey might get some valuable data here.
I'm not sure if there is an actual project waiting for our input here or if we're just discussing things, so maybe we have some time to collect some data?
I like the idea of relating the old kernels with the rescue concept. I suspect you're right that most users don't use old kernels (is there an auto-prune for this, like keep the last 3 kernels only?). They probably only access those when something goes wrong with the latest kernel, like in a rescue situation. I've had to access old kernels myself and I'm certainly no developer, so the use case exists (I can't be the only one!?)
I guess the core of my concern is that we are cleaning up clutter for users who don't mind the clutter, or actually want the clutter. I want to avoid designing for ourselves by focusing on our actual user's needs and tasks. Maybe I just lacked the knowledge about the user research that has gone on prior to this discussion.
What are your thoughts on the need to collect some data from Fedora users via a survey? Useful or redundant?
Thanks,
Kirk
On 06/20/2012 07:30 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote:
Hi Kirk,
On 2012-06-20 19:04, Kirk Bridger wrote:
1 - I think data should be collected before we make assumptions about our user base.
We need to take the user base as defined by the project board as a given:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base
It wasn't determined lightly and it was researched and deliberated and discussed throughout the community pretty carefully.
2 - I think categorizing is a better solution than hiding, as users with lots of kernels/OSs are more likely to be switching more often, vs users with just a few. The value of reducing clutter is minimized is clutter consists of 3-5 items, and hiding things makes it harder to do what you want to do.
Don't forget to consider, along with majority of users vs minority of users, how frequently vs infrequently users will be:
- Switching OSes
- Switching kernels
I believe switching OSes is going to be more frequent for even the Pokemon 'gotta catch 'em all' distro enthusiast than switching kernels within each OS, and the mockup that Martin put together definitely optimizes for switching OSes instead of switching kernels. The only user I know of that realistically switches between specific kernels on any kind of frequent basis is a kernel developer, and I haven't seen any complaints or concerns from kernel developers about the change. That being said, I can certainly reach out to a few and get some feedback from them, but I think they probably - since their menu has so many entries anyway - have highly customized grub conf files anyway so any defaults are likely not to affect them.
3 - I think removing clutter is a good goal, provided it meets our users needs (see comment #1)
+99 I'm glad we seem to be all on the same page about this part, we just need to sort out more of the other details.
~m _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 22:30:12 -0400, Máirín Duffy duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
The only user I know of that realistically switches between specific kernels on any kind of frequent basis is a kernel developer, and I haven't seen any complaints or concerns from kernel developers about the change. That being said, I can certainly reach out to a few and
Some of us fit more into a kernel tester category and need to run previous kernels more often than another OS. But I expect the people doing this are more advanced users and less likely to have issues with this than the typical Fedora user.
On 2012-06-20 15:39, Martin Sourada wrote:
IMHO not a bad idea. I have a few notes though:
- Fedora 16 and Fedora 17 should be considered separate operating systems (*if* they use different root).
Yeh, this is a good point. The first time I looked at the mockup I thought all the kernels were for Fedora 17, I wasn't really paying attention. Different releases should be treated as different OSes, great point +1
- Boot loader should behave look like boot-loader not like an
already running operating system (the "Welcome to Fedora 17" text is misleading)
This is a good point. We don't want to come off as a 'bad neighbor' to other OSes on a computer. (Not that Windows overwriting our ability to boot is neighborly or anything ;-) )
- Dual booters -- Fedora and Windows (or Mac)
============================================== These people probably just want to boot the latest version unless something is broken. They might or might not know what the kernel versions mean. It might be better to "hide" older kernels in submenu (or if grub2 allows some better css-like way, why not?)
I would add that I think a lot of these users might have a boot of Fedora or some other Linux just to try it, but they use OS X or Windows as their primary OS. They are dipping their toes in the water but haven't converted over yet. So they aren't going to want to fuss over kernel versions or multiple Fedora entries, which might come off as being rude to them.
- *nix enthusiasts/developers -- multi-booters
============================================== These people will probably have multiple operating systems installed, maybe even various versions of fedora. Let's say they have (for example) Fedora Rawhide, Fedora 17, Debian 6.0, FreeBSD 9 and Arch Linux. They know very well what kernel is, but if all installed kernels are listed there, the list gets rather large and it gets hard to quickly find the latest kernel. Especially for the two Fedoras that you can tell apart only by the fc18 vs. fc17 in kernel release number... While it would make selecting *older* kernel versions slower, I think it would be better to *hide* the older kernels in submenu, thus making the main menu easier to navigate. IMHO the gain of quicker selection of most recent kernel for each release would outweigh the less frequent slow down introduced by submenus.
+1 Although to be fair, this is a slowly dying use case as virtualization gets better and better.
- Massive virtualization
========================= These people have only one host operating system, the rest is in virtual machines. IMHO they are the only group that would *not* benefit from switch to sub-menus.
But it doesn't really hurt them all that much either. I'd say it's pretty neutral given how infrequently even advanced users have to switch between kernel versions of the same OS release.
IMHO, the gains to the first two groups outweigh the loss of the third group, but well, others might disagree. That's why we discuss things, right?
I don't see the third being a loss, just a neutral kind of thing.
So how would the bootloader screen would look like?
Welcome to GRUB 2 Select an OS to boot:
- Fedora Rawhide (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc18)
- Fedora 17 (with linux-3.6.0-23.fc17)
- Debian 6.0 (with linux-2.6.28.3-23)
Microsoft Windows 7
- Fedora Rawhide (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Fedora 17 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Debian 6.0 (Rescue)
- older kernels listed in this submenu, and possibly some special rescue mode(s)
- Microsoft Windows 7
- if we can only chainload win 7, this would not make sense, however if we could run rescue modes for win from grub, this where it
would be.
Above the first Rescue line this looks clean and elegant to me. However, while we can (maybe) control the string that Fedora spits out to be as neat and clean as you've written up there, we can't control other OS's spew. Microsoft's spew tends to be clean actually but other Linux distros might spew out a lot of unnecessary details in their line and it might be long enough as to get truncated and cause more confusion :(
(I don't know of a solution to other distro's bad behavior, but it is something to be aware of in the design)
The Fedora Rawhide rescue line and below - that's a submenu? How do you access it? (Just trynig to read your mockup properly here)
~m
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 22:19:59 -0400 Máirín Duffy wrote:
The Fedora Rawhide rescue line and below - that's a submenu? How do you access it? (Just trynig to read your mockup properly here)
Yeah, they are supposed to be submenus, accessed by selecting, say, Fedora 17 (Rescue) (or Troubleshooting, as you mentioned in another mail). Do I make more sense now? :)
Martin
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 07:44 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 22:19:59 -0400 Máirín Duffy wrote:
The Fedora Rawhide rescue line and below - that's a submenu? How do you access it? (Just trynig to read your mockup properly here)
Yeah, they are supposed to be submenus, accessed by selecting, say, Fedora 17 (Rescue) (or Troubleshooting, as you mentioned in another mail). Do I make more sense now? :)
Martin
I think I can jump in here. Wow, what a reading! Great points, great concerns! Great forum! Thank you Elad for starting this.
I think there could be a compromise for all parties. I personally cringe when I am introducing a Linux-first-timer to fedora, and GRUB shows up. Why? I sense the confusion they feel when they see all the options, especially two Linux kernels and two windows options. That's right ... two M$ Windoze options: one representing the rescue mode (yes, that happens sometimes and I have to explain ... "eh, choose the last one to run Windows" ... *duh*)
So, I agree with simplicity. So what if we have this?:
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | | | Welcome to GRUB 2 | | Select an OS to boot: | | ---------------------- | | | | Fedora 17 | | Microsoft Windows 7 | | OS-X 7 | | | | Other Boot Options >> | | | | | | | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Everything else can go under the last option. Peace!
Notice that I centred the menu options. From a design perspective, I think this looks better (I hope the restrictions presented by GRUB2 doesn't affect centralization). It also tingles my psyche to see excess space to the right and bottom of the menu -- as is in the present GRUB menus. Its a waste of screen estate and is very unaesthetic. Why not make the box/rectangle smaller -- perhaps with small quadrants at the edges (kinda matches the Gnome theme -- now I am causing trouble :-))??
Since we are discussing GRUB2 design, lets address everything.
Regards Onyeibo
+1000
-----Original Message----- From: design-team-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org [mailto:design-team-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Onyeibo Oku Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:30 PM To: Fedora Design Team Subject: Re: [Design-team] Fedora GRUB2 boot menu, from design perspective
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 07:44 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 22:19:59 -0400 Máirín Duffy wrote:
The Fedora Rawhide rescue line and below - that's a submenu? How do you access it? (Just trynig to read your mockup properly here)
Yeah, they are supposed to be submenus, accessed by selecting, say, Fedora 17 (Rescue) (or Troubleshooting, as you mentioned in another mail). Do I make more sense now? :)
Martin
I think I can jump in here. Wow, what a reading! Great points, great concerns! Great forum! Thank you Elad for starting this.
I think there could be a compromise for all parties. I personally cringe when I am introducing a Linux-first-timer to fedora, and GRUB shows up. Why? I sense the confusion they feel when they see all the options, especially two Linux kernels and two windows options. That's right ... two M$ Windoze options: one representing the rescue mode (yes, that happens sometimes and I have to explain ... "eh, choose the last one to run Windows" ... *duh*)
So, I agree with simplicity. So what if we have this?:
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | | | Welcome to GRUB 2 | | Select an OS to boot: | | ---------------------- | | | | Fedora 17 | | Microsoft Windows 7 | | OS-X 7 | | | | Other Boot Options >> | | | | | | | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Everything else can go under the last option. Peace!
Notice that I centred the menu options. From a design perspective, I think this looks better (I hope the restrictions presented by GRUB2 doesn't affect centralization). It also tingles my psyche to see excess space to the right and bottom of the menu -- as is in the present GRUB menus. Its a waste of screen estate and is very unaesthetic. Why not make the box/rectangle smaller -- perhaps with small quadrants at the edges (kinda matches the Gnome theme -- now I am causing trouble :-))??
Since we are discussing GRUB2 design, lets address everything.
Regards Onyeibo
_______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 23:31:29 -0700 Dan Mashal wrote:
+1000
well, well, aren't we having quite a lot of votes here? :D Anyway, I like this proposal also the best. I like the centring, and how nicely he grouped the other options. It is now much less cluttered and works probably rather well for all types of people! So +1 from me too.
BTW while we're discussing themes -- shouldn't we go for release (or perhaps even distro) agnostic theme? Currently the boot would look less than desirable: 1. Grub2 with Beefy Miracle 2. Distro specific boot screen (in Fedora release agnostic, and IMHO rather dull looking) 3. Distro/release specific login screen (in Fedora only bg is changed) 4. Whatever personalized desktop a user has
IMHO the jumping between beefy, fedora and back to beefy is rather odd and it would be better (and kinder to other distros) to have something not too flashy, yet fresh and professional looking and without any kind of fedora specific branding. How does that sound?
Just my two cents WRT the theme discussion Onyeibo started.
Cheers, Martin
It's not my dream solution but I am willing to compromise. I just wanted to raise my own concerns.
If I had it my way grub would be a blue fedora theme a la the red RHEL theme.
And you would be able to see all the kernels.
But again, in life you must compromise and I find this solution acceptable to me personally. :)
Dan On Jun 21, 2012 4:25 AM, "Martin Sourada" martin.sourada@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 23:31:29 -0700 Dan Mashal wrote:
+1000
well, well, aren't we having quite a lot of votes here? :D Anyway, I like this proposal also the best. I like the centring, and how nicely he grouped the other options. It is now much less cluttered and works probably rather well for all types of people! So +1 from me too.
BTW while we're discussing themes -- shouldn't we go for release (or perhaps even distro) agnostic theme? Currently the boot would look less than desirable:
- Grub2 with Beefy Miracle
- Distro specific boot screen (in Fedora release agnostic, and IMHO
rather dull looking) 3. Distro/release specific login screen (in Fedora only bg is changed) 4. Whatever personalized desktop a user has
IMHO the jumping between beefy, fedora and back to beefy is rather odd and it would be better (and kinder to other distros) to have something not too flashy, yet fresh and professional looking and without any kind of fedora specific branding. How does that sound?
Just my two cents WRT the theme discussion Onyeibo started.
Cheers, Martin
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
Hi Kirk! I'm really happy to see you around here again :)
On 2012-06-20 11:03, Kirk Bridger wrote:
I'm not an expert user but I don't think I'm novice either. I don't see why we need to HIDE the older versions behind another menu, just perhaps make it more clear that the old versions are still functional but are not the latest on the machine.
Martin made a pretty compelling case as to why putting all the kernel versions in the main menu is a bad idea.
Novice users have the "out" of saying "I don't know what this all means but I know I want to launch the most current version". And if they're dropped back here after a failure or two trying the current version they can try the older versions.
If novice users are dropped back to the bootloader after a crash, they can go to the submenu labeled 'Troubleshooting' where (it at least was intended, I don't remember how it actually went out) older kernels are available. We definitely have to revisit this for F18 and kudos to Elad for bringing it up.
This all assumes that we're limited to the current console-style menu. If we can use HTML/CSS or some other layout and styling we can make this info much more parse-able with styling and different font sizes/layout. If we can do more than just console can someone send a screenshot of what we can do, and maybe we can mock something up?
We are very limited in the bootloader environment. We're not in a full OS, don't have full access to the GFX card or any of the niceities of a full desktop environment. I don't know if it's possible to write something that would operate off of HTML and CSS but that is certainly less-than-trivial.
This is the theme I wrote up for F17 that was dropped at the last minute because of QA concerns: http://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2012/05/09/grub-2-theme-for-fedora-17/
Welcome to Fedora 17 (BeefyMiracle) CURRENT VERSIONS Fedora 17 (kernel-3.6.0-1.fc17) Superceded Versions Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-3.fc17) Fedora 17 (kernel-3.5.20-2.fc17) Fedora 16 (kernel-3.2.10-4.fc16) OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS Microsoft Windows 7Happy to hear thoughts on this approach.
Maybe if the user installs a new kernel, the first time they reboot, only the new kernel and the last known working kernel are shown, all older ones archived behind a submenu.
The issue I have with the above mockup, which looks nice in the case for which you designed it, is that Fedora overwhelms the menu and for a user who is playing with Fedora on the side and who has to use Windows or OS X as their primary OS (e.g., for work it's a requirement), it's a bit of a real estate hog.
~m
On 2012-06-20 03:40, Dan Mashal wrote:>
"Oh btw in Fedora 18 you have to go to advanced boot options to boot an older kernel now. Yeah I know, we've been able to do this for 20 years now since the dawn of time but they think it's better for novice users this way."
And one day I realized I am getting older. I can't pull all-nighters anymore and hack on code. My parents don't take care of me anymore, I have to make my own living, cook my own meals, and take care of my own living space. I can't have as much Hello Kitty stuff without people thinking I'm a little bit weird. I can't ride on some of the rides at Disney World anymore because I'm too big.
Life is change. Change is progress. It may be progress towards old age and an eventual death, sure, but the alternative - stasis - seems to me to be a hellish and completely undesirable alternative. How many movies and novels and other storylines have taken on the theme of a protoganist who never dies or is ageless (Twilight, haha) and whose life is miserable because they can never die, age, or change?
Change is the only way we can progress forward and innovate and make life better. By the same logic, 'we've been able to do this for 20 years now,' we would never have the television because we already had the radio. We would never have HD TV because we would have already had NTSC.
Just 1 example of many things. You can't expect Fedora to be a distro that you can really settle and get "used to" when it's constantly changing.
All distros are constantly changing. Compare any distro's current version to its version 4 releases ago. The entire Linux architecture is changing (for the better, I'd add), and Fedora is an upstream-loyal distro. If something is changed in how the kernel works, we are not going to fork it just to prevent change.
I know this is the whole point of the whole distro, to be "bleeding edge" and have the latest technologies in our awesome distro.
The point of our distro is not to be bleeding edge. We are not interested in anyone bleeding or getting cut. We are interested in making the latest all of our awesome upstreams are producing available to a wider audience.
In my daily life I'm a sysadmin. Figuring out how to do something on RHEL 5 vs RHEL 6 vs CentOS 5 vs CentOS 6 vs Fedora 13 Fedora 14 Fedora 15 Fedora 16 Fedora 17 Fedora 18 and what's different between each and every single one is annoying in every day life at work.
If you are a sysadmin, I can understand your attitude because if you are good at what you do (and i'm sure you are) you highly prioritize managing change and minimizing it as much as possible so systems don't break and unexpected problems don't crop up so you get called up at 2 AM to fix someting. Fedora is not meant for system administrators though. Fedora is a desktop distribution and is not intended to be a server OS, most certainly not as its primary or even secondary goal.
If your preference is a distro that minimizes change, might I suggest CentOS, Goose Linux, or Scientific Linux?
"Oh yeah so dude on Fedora 17 they moved to systemd. That service command doesn't work the same way and neither does chkconfig either anymore. Sorry bro deal with it."
Fedora is not the only distro that adopted systemd. That is a Linux OS architecture change much wider and further upstream than Fedora is.
~m
On 2012-06-20 03:24, Dan Mashal wrote:
To further add to my previous email, don't forget about your core user base. Since you are aiming for the "novice user" what happens to the "expert/intermediate user base"?
Fedora's core user base is *not* a novice user, whether you mean a novice to Linux or a novice to computers in general.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base
Fedora's target user is:
Voluntary Linux consumer (if you're a novice computer user and just want things to work, you're not going to use Linux.) Computer-friendly (if you're a novice computer user, you probably have a level of fear, not friendliness towardsc omputers) Likely collaborator (if you're a novice computer user, you likely do not have the time or skill set to contribute) General productivity user (aren't we all)
Do you just neglect them and they just accept all the changes you make in order to make Fedora more "Novice friendly"?
No, you're arguing against a state of affairs that does not exist in reality here.
Just shedding a different way of thinking on the matter. I respect everyone's contributions I'm just making my own personal opinion and voice heard since that what is so awesome about this community is that I can say how I feel and contribute my opinion while it may not be taken as "Oh my god this guy is so right what were we thinking?" it's definitely something to think about.
Actually a lot of thinking, time, effort, and research was put into the construction of that user base statement and corresponding wiki page and documents. I suggest very strongly, seeing your interest in the topic, that you take a good look at the documents in that section of the wiki and please feel free to come back with specific questions about that document. I do think the fedora-advisory-board list would be a better place for user base level discussions though, because the Fedora Project board owns the definition of the target user base. Here on the design team, we take that document as an input and use it as a tool to create designs for Fedora.
Hope this helps, ~m
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Quote: "Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly.
Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files."
If you wanted to make it easier for "novice users" then why do novice users have to do so much work out of the box to get stuff working? This is such a minor fix for "novice users".
Novice users will not need to change the configuration, it will work out of the box and will be easier to use. I see no reason to change the configuration, but in case some advanced users don't like this change, they can customize their boot menu as the see fit.
"Novice users" use Ubuntu. Think about why. I understand that Ubuntu and Fedora have different "religious" philosophies but this is reality without getting too in the the actual "religion" of FOSS and the 4 foundations of Fedora.
I disagree with you on that. If it is true, then we should just stop all UX design efforts we do, because all Fedora users are clearly experts. We can even drop the GUI, cause everyone who uses Fedora uses terminal commands all day.
Quote "Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed?
I think it should be Fedora $number"
So a "novice user" would have Rawhide installed? :)
We want it to be usable both to novice and advanced users to use Fedora easily. having the release number won't mean anything unless you have multiple releases of Fedora
A novice user just wants it to "work" "out of the box".
I mean it's really that simple.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Elad Alfassa elad@fedoraproject.orgwrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Dan Mashal dan.mashal@gmail.com wrote:
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
- Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different kernel?
Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files.
- It should just be "Fedora".
Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number
- I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or without
the theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
Well, I like how it looks with the theme, but if you don't like it you could always make your own theme to make it look like you want, or talk with upstream grub and explain to them why you think the default doesn't look good.
EOF
Dan On Jun 19, 2012 1:07 AM, "Elad Alfassa" elad@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Máirín Duffy duffy@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hi Elad,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:07 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Yeh, it definitely sounds like broken behavior. Maybe we should get together with Josh Boyer and Peter Jones and see if we can't figure
out
some way to have older kernels go under the submenu.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux kernel version here).
What is the stand of the design team on this?
Well, fwiw, I think you're correct, it should just be 'Fedora' (Maybe Fedora + $RELEASE_NUMBER) not 'Fedora Linux.' However, I think the kernel versions should be in the submenu with, if I understand correctly, the older kernels listed out, but the newest one should
just
say Fedora. Is that too extreme?
Sounds reasonable. Show kernel versions only when they are really needed.
~m
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa. _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
-- -Elad Alfassa.
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
design-team mailing list design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
On 2012-06-20 03:18, Dan Mashal wrote:
If you wanted to make it easier for "novice users" then why do novice users have to do so much work out of the box to get stuff working? This is such a minor fix for "novice users".
We are not where we want to be yet, but we are all working very hard each release to move forward to spread free software via Fedora to more and more people. Just because we haven't gotten there yet, I don't think we should give up and start walking backward.
"Novice users" use Ubuntu. Think about why. I understand that Ubuntu and Fedora have different "religious" philosophies but this is reality without getting too in the the actual "religion" of FOSS and the 4 foundations of Fedora.
Novice computer users do not use Linux, and even worse, the vast majority of novice users do not use free software, not even Inkscape on OS X or Windows. I believe everyone is entitled to free software, especially those who don't have access to proprietary tools that could make their lives better for example, economic reasons. I and I believe many others in Fedora would like to help these folks enjoy software freedom just as all of us privileged users are able to. The bar should not be set so high as it is right now.
Quote "Without release number? what if you have both Rawhide and 17 installed? I think it should be Fedora $number"
So a "novice user" would have Rawhide installed? :)
A novice user would not have Rawhide installed, but novice users are not the only people using Fedora. Novice users by default would not see GRUB on their system because it is not displayed by default - you have to hit either esc or F2 i think to see it. However, novice users *will* see 'Fedora 17' or whatnot when they try to boot their Live USB key because they have a timeout built-in so the boot menu always displays. I believe the same code that displays the name of the kernel in grub2 does so in syslinux (What's used for the live usb bootmenu) as well, so I am pretty sure they should be consistent across boot loaders.
Having taught some pretty bright high school students how to use Inkscape and Gimp using a classroom full of Live USB booted Fedoras, I can say from experience there are a lot of pitfalls to making the bootloader screen anything but simple if we want to make Fedora accessible to a more diverse community.
A novice user just wants it to "work" "out of the box".
I mean it's really that simple.
No, it's not. Because every user has a different thing they are trying to do. Say user 1 wants to do "X" and users 2 wants to do "Y". If you make "X" work out-of-the-box, then maybe "Y" necessarily cannot work out of the box. (example, X = printing to a network printer without hassle, Y = not getting hacked because you have no firewall and having important data stolen.)
~m
On 20/06/12 08:09, Elad Alfassa wrote:
Simply because we want to make Fedora easier to use. For novice users, the kernel versions are just noise, they mean nothing, and probably cause a lot of confusion. Especially if they dual-boot, they wouldn't know what to choose, and might actually boot an older kernel regularly. Furthermore, you can always revert to the current behaviour by simply editing some configuration files.
Well if you can show me what to edit to keep all kernels showing. I would appreciate it. I believe it's in: /etc/grub.d/10_linux But not being a scripter :(
On 2012-06-19 22:08, Dan Mashal wrote:
Personal opinion from a longtime fedora user:
- Why do I have to go to a separate menu to choose a different
kernel? Granted, I don't often have to choose an older or custom kernel but "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
You should have to go to a separate menu to choose a different kernel because as you yourself admitted you do not often have to choose an older or custom kernel. If they are always displayed when most of the time you don't need them, they are cluttering up the menu and making it harder for you to choose what you really want from a more manageable set of choices.
- It should just be "Fedora".
I hear your opinion on this. We could get guidance on the board from this if we can't decide.
- I don't like the way the grub menu looks right now with or
without the theme. I like the old text non ubuntu/debian looking grub menu but that's just the oldskool person in me talking.
Again, your personal opinion is noted. If oldskool is your interest though, it might be better to either go with a more oldskool distro or install an oldskool looking theme if that is your preference.
~m
On 18/06/12 16:07, Elad Alfassa wrote:
refer to this thread in -devel: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-June/168712.html
As I understand, by design, we wanted the older kernels to appear in the "Advanced options" menu, but right now, it breaks every time you run a kernel update.
Caused by Grubby. iirc the dev(s) not going to change it.
Also, the string Fedora Linux is kinda wrong, cause the OS is called Fedora. It should be something like Fedora (with Linux /kernel version here/).
Caused by Grub2-mkconfig
design-team@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Bruno Wolff III -
Dan Mashal -
Elad Alfassa -
Frank Murphy -
Kirk Bridger -
Martin Sourada -
Máirín Duffy -
Onyeibo Oku