1 |
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 10:14:04AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 15:37 +0100, Andrea Barisani wrote: |
3 |
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 02:47:45PM +0000, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
4 |
> > > We have received *numerous* complaints from users about the decision to |
5 |
> > > remove stage 1 and 2 from the installation documentation. I realize it's |
6 |
> > > still available if users are willing to dig for it, but not all users do. |
7 |
> > > |
8 |
> > > In my years of monitoring www@g.o, we've received the most |
9 |
> > > complaints about this decision than any other single decision. Is there a |
10 |
> > > way we can re-introduce the stages into the installation documentation, |
11 |
> > > perhaps with gigantic warnings saying, "for advanced users only" or "use at |
12 |
> > > your own risk"? |
13 |
> > > |
14 |
> > > --kurt |
15 |
> > > |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > I perfectly agree with this request, we should provide the choice and clear |
18 |
> > point that out (along with all the correlated risks) instead of simply |
19 |
> > "hiding" the option. And I sincerely hope there's no intention to remove |
20 |
> > stage1/stage2 tarballs in the future because that would be a really a bad thing |
21 |
> > imho. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> The problem with listing risks and such is the users aren't listening. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> They are ignoring our warnings and breaking their own systems, then |
26 |
> filing bugs. The problem is that these are *not* bugs, but issues with |
27 |
> incompatibility. It is impossible to install something that requires a |
28 |
> configured kernel before you have a configured kernel. |
29 |
> |
30 |
|
31 |
I still think that pointing things with a *huge* warning shouldn't be |
32 |
a problem...otherwise we would always end up "hiding" things prone to user |
33 |
error because we think that users are listening. At least let's draft a nice |
34 |
and visible document explaining the change and why people should not use this |
35 |
anymore since judging from the complaints lots of people just don't get it. |
36 |
|
37 |
> Now, on the topic of the tarballs. |
38 |
> |
39 |
> Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2 |
40 |
> tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball. |
41 |
> |
42 |
|
43 |
Oh well nothing. I don't doubt that userwise they are not needed...but there |
44 |
might be other needs developerwise where the two stages are useful. |
45 |
|
46 |
So fair enough, remove it from the docs...but at least let's explain why we |
47 |
are doing this since complaints are there (legit or not). |
48 |
|
49 |
-- |
50 |
Andrea Barisani <lcars@g.o> .*. |
51 |
Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer V |
52 |
( ) |
53 |
PGP-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc ( ) |
54 |
0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E ^^_^^ |
55 |
"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate" |
56 |
-- |
57 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |