John on S8

[John]

Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Colin Watson wrote:
>
>  
>
>>On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 12:06:29PM +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>This is an issue to consider in itself.  The current approach gives
>>>>the user no choice about using the network; once we do a security
>>>>update for, say, the kernel, or XFree86, all installations from
>>>>Internet-connected systems would need to download those packages,
>>>>even if they're on a modem.  This seems like a potentially serious
>>>>usability issue for many users.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Yes, I agree there needs to be a question asked.
>>>      
>>>
>>We also add http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ (i.e. the regular archive,
>>not security) at the moment. In that case, I strongly believe that we
>>need to ask for a mirror.
>>
>>We can probably get away without the mirror question in the case of
>>security.
>>    
>>
>
>I was discussing this issue with Colin on irc and he suggested correctly
>to move it here.
>
>Colin was suggesting to ask something like: "Do you want to download
>updates from the network?"
>  
>
Now? (Update source.list. Do so)
Later? (Update source.list.)
regularly? (Update source.list,  set up a cronjob to download them. Make 
it clear that they are not being installed. Email someone when updates 
are ready to be installed).

>We might want to ask if they want to enable security, but i don't think we
>need to ask for anything more for the following reasons:
>  
>
What do you mean, "enable security?" You need to explain this one, 
Firewall? AV software? (Windows users may think that). Browser settings 
(IE users may think that)? selinux (I might think that).

>1 once we go final there will be no updates other than security (or
>  almost) so i don't think that kind of question will make sence in a
>  short time (plus it's not translated).
>
>2 Asking for a mirror means adding at least 2 to 4 questions:  hostname /
>  directory and possibily proxy (and in case of failure repeat all the
>  above with a nice prompt telling the user: "hey the mirror isn't
>  working!").  And as it is now, if the default can be reached we write
>  the lines and that's it, otherwise we write them commented out.
>  users can always run apt-setup and add more lines without losing what
>  they have and getting the full set of questions.
>  
>

If you can do this in _one_ form usability will be much improved. I find 
that if I have a form in front of me I can see where we're going. I find 
programs that ask one question at a time vastly annoying. Especially 
when they erase the screen so I can't see what went before.



>3 If an admin is installing from a local mirror, he has the knowledge to
>  modify the apt lines as they fit better in his environment.
>  
>

When I installed Fedora Core 2.90, I create a virtual domain, 
Fedora.demo.lan, and installed from that. No proxy settings to bother.

I configured Apache to proxy the Fedora site.

It worked a treat, I downloaded just those files necessary for the 
install, I can reinstall at LAN speeds rather than modem speeds etc etc.

Yes, I do use Squid and I do know about transparent proxy. However, 
Apache allows me to remap the world: I can put the updates at /updates/, 
local packages at /local/ etc.