Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Gentoo: Dev
Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011
 

Index | Next | Previous | View Flat


1i5t5.duncan at cox

Aug 24, 2011, 6:03 AM


Views: 486
Permalink
Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 [In reply to]

Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 24 Aug 2011 07:07:54 -0400 as excerpted:

> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Patrick Lauer <patrick [at] gentoo>
> wrote:
>> If you sneakily add something to cron.daily by default you can get
>> pretty nice coverage. But I guess anyone trying that in Gentooland will
>> meet some rather unpleasant resistance :)
>
> Well, we could always broadcast the news widely (lists, forums,
> eselect news, and so on).
>
> I'd also make it controllable via use flag. Put the client and the
> cron.daily file in a package, and then make that a use-dependency of
> something everybody has (the profile if profiles support this (don't
> think they do), and if not pick something that correlates well with
> people who would benefit from this feature.
>
> Users can opt-out via use flag.
>
> You can also start out with it being opt-in (use flag off by default in
> profiles), and then turn it on later (with notice/etc).
>
> The key is to not be sneaky about it.

Agreed on the no-sneaky bit.

The practical question is what to make it a USE flag of? Baselayout/
openrc? Portage?

Personally, I'd start with a couple paragraphs in the handbook describing
the package and why one really /does/ want it installed and setup but
that Gentoo gives the user the option, as part of the installation
section, presumably thrown in with choosing the cron and syslog daemons,
etc.

Then I'd do the PR thing as you mention, pointing out that it's in the
handbook now, so new users will likely be installing it, and to avoid
skewing the numbers toward the new installations, existing installations
should consider it as well. Existing users aren't likely to want the
focus to shift to packages only the noobs are likely to install, for
instance. Setup a bit of a competition there, and I'd guess you're
likely to get better buy-in from existing users.

I'd leave the USE flag dependency out of it, at least initially. It
could always be added later, if thought necessary. But I suspect that if
it's presented well in the handbook, many new users will install it, and
if that fact is pointed out to existing users in appropriate forum/list
threads, etc, many existing users will as well, just to "keep up",
statistically. Yet if it's a separate package that must be separately
installed, there's no way people can say it wasn't their choice, as they
might be able to if it's a USE flag they weren't paying attention to,
particularly if that flag defaults on. Make it an active choice and
people are far more likely to continue with it, too, than if they felt in
any way that it was pushed on them, with little choice.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

Subject User Time
Gentoostats, SoC 2011 vikraman.choudhury at gmail Aug 22, 2011, 2:20 PM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 dilfridge at gentoo Aug 23, 2011, 9:16 AM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 tomka at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 3:31 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 patrick at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 3:48 AM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 dilfridge at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 4:03 AM
            Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 tomka at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 4:45 AM
            Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 mgorny at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 1:33 AM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 rich0 at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 4:07 AM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 tomka at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 4:13 AM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 realnc at arcor Aug 25, 2011, 3:42 AM
            Re: Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 hwoarang at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 5:43 AM
                Re: Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 mail at patrick-nagel Aug 25, 2011, 7:15 AM
                    Re: Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 grobian at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 7:48 AM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 neddyseagoon at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 3:48 AM
            Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 rich0 at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 5:20 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 mario.fetka at gmail Aug 24, 2011, 4:59 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 rich0 at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 5:05 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 1i5t5.duncan at cox Aug 24, 2011, 6:03 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 antarus at gentoo Aug 24, 2011, 7:47 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 antarus at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 7:35 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 rich0 at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 7:49 AM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 jmbsvicetto at gentoo Aug 25, 2011, 8:18 PM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 rdalek1967 at gmail Aug 26, 2011, 2:04 AM
        Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 dberkholz at gentoo Aug 29, 2011, 2:23 PM
            Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 jmbsvicetto at gentoo Aug 29, 2011, 6:53 PM
                Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 mattst88 at gentoo Aug 29, 2011, 7:11 PM
    Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 realnc at gmail Apr 27, 2012, 10:34 AM
        Re: Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 antarus at gentoo Apr 27, 2012, 11:42 AM
        Re: Re: Gentoostats, SoC 2011 gaydarov at cs Apr 28, 2012, 12:28 PM

  Index | Next | Previous | View Flat
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.