[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Newbie Idea

> On 27 Apr 1999 jfm2@club-internet.fr wrote:
> > I disagree with Donovan here not about dropping packages (I already
> > explained why it we should not make Indy, at least the real version, a
> > crippled distrib) but I remeber being confused in front of a distrib
> > who had tons of software like 6 web servers so I skipped package after
> > packege I was not interested in and ended missing what I was looking.
> perhaps one way we could "have it both ways" would be to put "redundant"
> packages on a second CD and not have them show up in the install. 

When treating with newbies whenever possible you must allow them to
choose car's color provided it is black.  Also every economist will
tell you about decreasing marginal usefulness: the usefulness of a 6th
web server is close to zero and even negative by the fact it confuses

> > No don't, this is supposed to be a distribution made by users for
> > users not a distrib made by an elite telling the unwashed masses what
> I hope I didn't sound like "the elite", ugh. Actually, end users really
> have an eye for things that experienced users overlook. This "package
> selection" dilemma is a good example. Thinking about it more deeply, I am
> starting to feel like the "uninformed" were right all along. But coming up
> with a solution that will work is something of a challenge.

I don't think so but the reply looked like him feeling chastized that
is why I emphasized the "democratic" nature of the project.

> I think I remember being able to find the F1-package descriptions as a
> newbie, but some of the packages ( eg "UUCP", "bind", "NIS"   ) were just
> beyond my comprehension at the time, so I just selected everything. 

At this  time there were no "workstation" installs

> > I agree about Indy 0.1 (and 0.2) being far from what is needed but for
> > one part we didn't have lots of {,wo}manpower and in addition Indy is
> > a distrib who needs to be on end user stores and with paper doc coming
> > with it in order to be of use for the people we target.  Until then we
> one thing we can do ( I can make a start ) is write some docs about the
> "groups" of packages, what those groups mean, and who might want to use
> which groups of packages. 
> The group descriptions are a little confusing in places ( I am still a
> little confused by the meaning of "X windows with emacs". I guess it
> means the athena build of emacs ... )

It was for VI users not selecting it.

			Jean Francois Martinez

Project Independence: Linux for the Masses