I dont know if this issue has been talked about in great detail, but I think more than just one or two people have the problem and perhaps a best practices needs to be set. The tutorial documentation doesn't seem to cover this in much detail
------------------------------------- The problem ----------- Inconsistent amounts of information are reaching users through information given by debconf. Some developers have delt with this by including some information but not others, or by including no information at all. Case Study ---------- 'lilo' on the Open Projects Network came into #debian-devel puzzled as to which X server he was running, and if it was even a 4.x version. Later, it was figred out that he didn't choose the correct XFree86 server in the debconf questions provided. He didn't know that the "xserver-xfree86" server is a 4.x server, and that the rest of the "xserver-*" servers are 3.x servers. This led to user disconnect as to which server to pick for his card and he chose the 3.x server that matched his card instead of the 4.x server, which he would have chose with the proper knowledge. I tried to convince the packages maintainer to include information as to help users to make an informed decision of this option, and he refused to on the grounds that the information should be in the release notes instead. However, after a user chooses a server they see a large statement on how the paths to configuration files for 4.x servers differ from 3.x servers. Elements -------- A possibly common user error could be helped by inserting information into a debconf information dialog before a long list of choices or it could be included in documentation. However, another possibly common issue is allready included in that packages debconf template. The maintainer has also been asked not to add more "chatter" into the debconf interaction, while others ask for more information to beable to make decisions on questions such as the above. One Possible Solution --------------------- Remove most informational displays from debconf that aren't relating to critical or grave issues. Put other information in either the README.Debian or other documentation, such as the release notes. ---------------------------------------------------- Is this something that should be discussed before debconf is littered with too much information that should really have been kept in documentation? Or should debconf be expanded into a tool to notify users of anything about what they are just about to choose/do? Thanks for any input. -- Scott Dier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.ringworld.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp5u6iTnYS9S.pgp
Description: PGP signature
