May 2009 - openSUSE Features - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[openFATE 306419] New version of storebackup available
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 09 Jun '09

09 Jun '09

Feature added by: hou ghi (houghi) Feature #306419, revision 1, last change by Title: New version of storebackup available Requested by: hou ghi (houghi) Description: There is a new version of storebackup available. The version that can be downloaded is 1.19 http://software.opensuse.org/search?baseproject=openSUSE%3AFactory&p=1&q=st… (http://software.opensuse.org/search?baseproject=openSUSE%3AFactory&p=1&q=st…) One user has version 2.0 available The new version at this moment is 3.0 The current honmepages is NOT on sourceforge anymore. The user has moved his page to http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/storebackup The direct link to the download page is http://www.very-clever.com/download/nongnu/storebackup/ (http://www.very-clever.com/download/nongnu/storebackup/) There also is a large PDF file available The reason the new version is much better is because there has been a huge increase in speed of backing up over e.g. NFS or rsync. Sometimes 10 times faster from the second backup on. Also it is unwise to have old software in the repo if newer is available. houghi -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/306419

1 3

[openFATE 306459] Use speedboot on 11.2 or 11.3
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 09 Jun '09

09 Jun '09

Feature added by: andrea florio (anubisg1) Feature #306459, revision 1, last change by Title: Use speedboot on 11.2 or 11.3 openSUSE-11.2: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable openSUSE-11.3: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: andrea florio (anubisg1) Description: Mandriva is currently using Speedboot to allow the enduser the machine is booting faster: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=mandriva_speedboot&num=1 i think we could use it too, on my aspire one for example the machine boot in about 16 seconds (pretty fast eh?) fro grub lo SHELL or XDM login, the desktop manager take almost same time, about 15 seconds.. lots of time compared to boot time, infact if i use autologin before be able to use the pc i have to wait about 32seconds because, evenif earlyxdm is enable, xdm service itself is the last service before reaching init 5 -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/306459

1 2

[openFATE 305846] Add the us_int (us international with euro sign keyboard)
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 09 Jun '09

09 Jun '09

Feature added by: Joop Boonen (worldcitizen) Feature #305846, revision 1, last change by Title: Add the us_int (us international with euro sign keyboard) openSUSE-11.2: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important openSUSE-11.3: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Joop Boonen (worldcitizen) Description: Add the us_int (us international with euro sign on "5" key keyboard) in the choices in the installation process (when the keyboard can be chosen). This way it'll be easier to choose this lay-out. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/305846

1 9

[openFate 305735] Correctly detect keyboard model on laptops
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 08 Jun '09

08 Jun '09

Feature added by: Vincent Untz (vuntz) Feature #305735, revision 1, last change by Title: Correctly detect keyboard model on laptops openSUSE-11.2: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: Vincent Untz (vuntz) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: The default configuration of X always gives you a keyboard using the microsoftpro model. However, on laptops, it'd be better to actually use the model of this laptop -- it's certainly possible to have a script to detect this. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305735

1 5

[openFATE 306428] Reduction and management of the proxy users in a OES deployment
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 08 Jun '09

08 Jun '09

Feature added by: Haripriya Srinivasaraghavan (sharipriya) Feature #306428, revision 1, last change by Title: Reduction and management of the proxy users in a OES deployment Requested by: Haripriya Srinivasaraghavan (sharipriya) Description: ECO for: 1) A proxy user screen at the beginning of OES installation, where the following fields would be present * A proxy user input field which is auto-populated with a proxy user from the relevant scope - this could be a name of the user if already existing, or the name of a new user to create. The name entered in this field will become the default “OES proxy user” for all the services on that server. * A proxy user password field which will be filled by the install user. * A radio button which allows the administrator to select creation of proxy users at any of various levels/scope– * one proxy user per service per server * one proxy user per server (Default) * one proxy user per partition * one proxy user per tree * For all the services using proxy user, the proxy user and password fields will be auto-populated. The services will add the required rights or policies to this proxy user. * Based on the granularity of proxy users, this utility will allow the administrator to reset the proxy user passwords of the proxy user for all the services on a given OES box. 2) A utility to change all the proxy user passwords with one command. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/306428

1 7

[openFATE 306197] Ship multiple automake versions.
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 05 Jun '09

05 Jun '09

Feature added by: Luis Medinas (lmedinas) Feature #306197, revision 1, last change by Title: Ship multiple automake versions. openSUSE-11.2: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Luis Medinas (lmedinas) Description: In order to build gnome from svn (probably other projects need it too) we need automake-1.4 1.7 1.8 and 1.9. It would be good if we deliver an option to work with update-alternatives to choose the automake version. This should really be integrated in the base system. This is a goal for 11.2 from the GNOME team, having gnome svn build without building from source this dependencies. Usually this tools are used by Gnome developers. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/306197

1 4

[openFate 305681] yast2 remote and vnc server
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 05 Jun '09

05 Jun '09

Feature added by: andrea florio (anubisg1) Feature #305681, revision 1, last change by Title: yast2 remote and vnc server openSUSE-11.2: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Desirable Requested by: andrea florio (anubisg1) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: the remote yast module should start a vnc (and/or rdp) server too.. right now it simply open firewall ports, that means it is un-usefull like that... because it not allow you to control remotly the pc -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/?rm=feature_show&id=305681

1 4

[openFATE 305808] 1-click install without permanent subscription to repo
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 03 Jun '09

03 Jun '09

Feature added by: Johan Kotze (gogga) Feature #305808, revision 1, last change by Title: 1-click install without permanent subscription to repo openSUSE-11.2: Unconfirmed Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Johan Kotze (gogga) Description: I would like to have the option of using 1-click install, but not be permanently subscribed to the repositories. Example. I am interested in qcad. It is in the education repository and it is the only package in that repository that I am interested in. I use 1-click install, but now my system is updated to be permanently subscribed to the education repo. This adds to the startup time of zypper and all other package management tools. This could be quite easily implemented by just disabling the repo once the install has finished or just remembering which repo's were added during the 1-click install and just remove them again. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/305808

1 6

[openFATE 302963] Rating support for FATE
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 30 May '09

30 May '09

Feature changed by: Rajko Matovic (rajko_m) Feature #302963, revision 26 Title: Rating support for FATE openFATE: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: FATE is becoming a huge database of useless information. Most of this come to the fact that there is only syntantic checking but not social checking. Usecase: Searching and navigating produces lot of: * Duplicate features * Incomplete features (no use cases, examples) * Vague features (a.k.a "#xxxxx YaST should be improved" ) * copy and paste features Features should support rating in the slashdot way (Insightful, Interesting, Informative, Troll, Funny) and rating from 1 to 5. The rating could be used so the same people using FATE could score down low- quality features than only make the process of information flow more difficult. Score threshold could be set by people so only high quality, well specified features are shown. It is important that searching could be done using this ratings. It should be possible to generate rankings over this ratings. Current status FATE does not offer anything to filter low quality features User Experience Query dialog would gain an option for searching. Feature editor would gain a rating dialog where different people would express their rating. Search would be over an average or agregation of this scores. Scores should be saved per rater. Contingency Plan No contingency plan at the software level. At the process level, add comments to every feature lacking business case, detailed description, real benefits, and more important, scope. Documentation Impact: Only needs to be mentioned in the handbook. Test Case: * rate a feature in one or two dimensions (score and category) * search for features >= or <= certain rating Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Threshold for feature processing should save thousands of dollars in wasted time doing ping pong, needinfos for features with incomplete information. Even engineering could be optimized when features with no real business case dissapear by social tagging. Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-04-02 01:26:51) Sounds like an interesting idea for openSUSE. I am looking forward towards considering this for some Phase 2 or so once openFATE (or whatever the name is going to be) is up and running. #3: Stephan Binner (beineri) (2009-01-17 16:03:07) (reply to #1) openFATE is now up and running. Can this request be made public to openSUSE.org partner? #2: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-11-14 18:05:55) Michl, for the openFATE work. (For SLE, I expect the PMs to take on much of this.) #4: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) (2009-01-28 16:04:18) This would be great to see. For reference, see https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu with some good ideas. Also a tag cloud like the build service has might be nice. #5: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) (2009-01-28 16:14:23) (reply to #4) We will release a new openFATE version by the end of the week with both voting and tagging support (including a cloud ;)) #7: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) (2009-01-30 20:29:40) (reply to #5) Awesome! #6: Thomas Schmidt (digitaltomm) (2009-01-30 15:12:39) Rating features is available now in openfate with the three options -0 +. Searching for features with or above a certain score is not yet there. Do we need to integrate the voting and search by rating stuff in the FATE client or is this just a community feature? #8: Stephan Binner (beineri) (2009-01-31 11:46:14) (reply to #6) Can you please add a voting column to the browse/query result list and allow sorting by it? Atm you seem to be only able to view the top 5 voted requests (on the dashboard). #10: Michael Löffler (michl19) (2009-02-02 11:35:31) (reply to #8) Yes, it would be useful to see the score already while brosing through the features. #9: Michael Löffler (michl19) (2009-02-02 11:34:32) (reply to #6) Voting is not necessary for the internal client. Internal features should be more driven by use case and business case. For openFate the public opinion is more important to know. But the voting score of external features should be displayed internally. #11: Klaas Freitag (kfreitag) (2009-05-06 16:41:29) (reply to #6) I think what the currently implemented rating is a kind of value for "public interest" but not so much about the quality of a feature. How I understand this featurerequest it is about how helpful, interesting and complete a feature is. I think it would be good to have this kind of rating because that helps people to learn what good features are and hopefully improves the overall quality of the FATE contents. The only downside I see is that there are too many different "ratings" and users get confused. #12: Rajko Matovic (rajko_m) (2009-05-30 14:29:43) (reply to #11) It seems somewhat elitistic and inconsisten with openFATE idea that "public interest" is not the most important quality of the requested feature. Although there is a problem with current status of voting, it is now one way street, like in polls, you vote and forget. When someone adds comment that might change public opinion, there is no way for openFate users to change their vote, and all previous votes may, or may not have meaning, depends on the nature of added comment. #13: Rajko Matovic (rajko_m) (2009-05-30 14:47:27) Adding non-interactive voting to interactive discussion about feature is not the way to collect public opinion about feature. Voting has to be interactive, whith notification (email) to each user that there is a change requiring their attention. If user has not time or interest to partcipate then his vote has to be discarded, to keep validity of the rest of the votes. Voting can be made automatic via notification email with links to "no change", "change my vote", "cancel my partcipation in voting". + #14: Rajko Matovic (rajko_m) (2009-05-30 15:01:45) (reply to #13) + Beineri, just explained me that voting is interactive - which one has + to have a bit of adventurer nature to discover. Few icons that appear + are really not self explanatory - added help button that will explain + what each of them means before you press them would be appreciated. -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/302963

1 0

[openFATE 302963] Rating support for FATE
by fate_noreply＠suse.de 30 May '09

30 May '09

Feature changed by: Rajko Matovic (rajko_m) Feature #302963, revision 24 Title: Rating support for FATE openFATE: Evaluation Priority Requester: Important Requested by: Duncan Mac-Vicar (dmacvicar) Partner organization: openSUSE.org Description: FATE is becoming a huge database of useless information. Most of this come to the fact that there is only syntantic checking but not social checking. Usecase: Searching and navigating produces lot of: * Duplicate features * Incomplete features (no use cases, examples) * Vague features (a.k.a "#xxxxx YaST should be improved" ) * copy and paste features Features should support rating in the slashdot way (Insightful, Interesting, Informative, Troll, Funny) and rating from 1 to 5. The rating could be used so the same people using FATE could score down low- quality features than only make the process of information flow more difficult. Score threshold could be set by people so only high quality, well specified features are shown. It is important that searching could be done using this ratings. It should be possible to generate rankings over this ratings. Current status FATE does not offer anything to filter low quality features User Experience Query dialog would gain an option for searching. Feature editor would gain a rating dialog where different people would express their rating. Search would be over an average or agregation of this scores. Scores should be saved per rater. Contingency Plan No contingency plan at the software level. At the process level, add comments to every feature lacking business case, detailed description, real benefits, and more important, scope. Documentation Impact: Only needs to be mentioned in the handbook. Test Case: * rate a feature in one or two dimensions (score and category) * search for features >= or <= certain rating Business case (Partner benefit): openSUSE.org: Threshold for feature processing should save thousands of dollars in wasted time doing ping pong, needinfos for features with incomplete information. Even engineering could be optimized when features with no real business case dissapear by social tagging. Discussion: #1: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-04-02 01:26:51) Sounds like an interesting idea for openSUSE. I am looking forward towards considering this for some Phase 2 or so once openFATE (or whatever the name is going to be) is up and running. #3: Stephan Binner (beineri) (2009-01-17 16:03:07) (reply to #1) openFATE is now up and running. Can this request be made public to openSUSE.org partner? #2: Gerald Pfeifer (geraldpfeifer) (2008-11-14 18:05:55) Michl, for the openFATE work. (For SLE, I expect the PMs to take on much of this.) #4: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) (2009-01-28 16:04:18) This would be great to see. For reference, see https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu with some good ideas. Also a tag cloud like the build service has might be nice. #5: Andre Duffeck (aduffeck) (2009-01-28 16:14:23) (reply to #4) We will release a new openFATE version by the end of the week with both voting and tagging support (including a cloud ;)) #7: Francis Giannaros (apokryphos) (2009-01-30 20:29:40) (reply to #5) Awesome! #6: Thomas Schmidt (digitaltomm) (2009-01-30 15:12:39) Rating features is available now in openfate with the three options -0 +. Searching for features with or above a certain score is not yet there. Do we need to integrate the voting and search by rating stuff in the FATE client or is this just a community feature? #8: Stephan Binner (beineri) (2009-01-31 11:46:14) (reply to #6) Can you please add a voting column to the browse/query result list and allow sorting by it? Atm you seem to be only able to view the top 5 voted requests (on the dashboard). #10: Michael Löffler (michl19) (2009-02-02 11:35:31) (reply to #8) Yes, it would be useful to see the score already while brosing through the features. #9: Michael Löffler (michl19) (2009-02-02 11:34:32) (reply to #6) Voting is not necessary for the internal client. Internal features should be more driven by use case and business case. For openFate the public opinion is more important to know. But the voting score of external features should be displayed internally. #11: Klaas Freitag (kfreitag) (2009-05-06 16:41:29) (reply to #6) I think what the currently implemented rating is a kind of value for "public interest" but not so much about the quality of a feature. How I understand this featurerequest it is about how helpful, interesting and complete a feature is. I think it would be good to have this kind of rating because that helps people to learn what good features are and hopefully improves the overall quality of the FATE contents. The only downside I see is that there are too many different "ratings" and users get confused. #12: Rajko Matovic (rajko_m) (2009-05-30 14:29:43) (reply to #11) It seems somewhat elitistic and inconsisten with openFATE idea that "public interest" is not the most important quality of the requested feature. Although there is a problem with current status of voting, it is now one way street, like in polls, you vote and forget. When someone adds comment that might change public opinion, there is no way for openFate users to change their vote, and all previous votes may, or may not have meaning, depends on the nature of added comment. + #13: Rajko Matovic (rajko_m) (2009-05-30 14:47:27) + Adding non-interactive voting to interactive discussion about feature + is not the way to collect public opinion about feature. Voting has to + be interactive, whith notification (email) to each user that there is a + change requiring their attention. If user has not time or interest to + partcipate then his vote has to be discarded, to keep validity of the + rest of the votes. Voting can be made automatic via notification email + with links to "no change", "change my vote", "cancel my partcipation in + voting". -- openSUSE Feature: https://features.opensuse.org/302963

1 0