FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-24-2011, 12:05 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Thomas Kahle <tomka@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Sorry, but NO. *If you want you can make a big noise message that asks
> users to install the cron-job but opt-out is not an option here.

Well, that's up to the Council/Trustees ultimately, but opinions (and
better still reasoning) are welcome since both would no-doubt want to
reflect the will of the community (and whatever is legal in the
jurisdictions that matter).

One option that many distros employ is a forced opt-in/out decision.
During the install process they simply ask the user, and they have to
hit either yes or no to continue. The reason most people don't opt-in
is that they don't think about it, and this forces the issue.

The Gentoo analogue would be to put something in make.conf or whatever
that must be set one way or another. Maybe have an opt-in use flag
and an opt-out use flag and if you don't set either emerge just dies
with a notice or something. No doubt somebody could come up with a
more elegant solution.

Maybe another line of discussion that could inform the debate is what
the value of this information is? For a company, knowing what
packages are popular helps them to allocate resources. Gentoo is a
volunteer effort and devs allocate their effort based on personal
preference, though perhaps some would care about package popularity to
an extent. So, we might not benefit to the same degree from this kind
of information, since we can't crack the whip and force people to fix
some broken package that is popular.

Rich
 
Old 08-24-2011, 01:03 PM
Duncan
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 24 Aug 2011 07:07:54 -0400 as excerpted:

> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>> If you sneakily add something to cron.daily by default you can get
>> pretty nice coverage. But I guess anyone trying that in Gentooland will
>> meet some rather unpleasant resistance
>
> Well, we could always broadcast the news widely (lists, forums,
> eselect news, and so on).
>
> I'd also make it controllable via use flag. Put the client and the
> cron.daily file in a package, and then make that a use-dependency of
> something everybody has (the profile if profiles support this (don't
> think they do), and if not pick something that correlates well with
> people who would benefit from this feature.
>
> Users can opt-out via use flag.
>
> You can also start out with it being opt-in (use flag off by default in
> profiles), and then turn it on later (with notice/etc).
>
> The key is to not be sneaky about it.

Agreed on the no-sneaky bit.

The practical question is what to make it a USE flag of? Baselayout/
openrc? Portage?

Personally, I'd start with a couple paragraphs in the handbook describing
the package and why one really /does/ want it installed and setup but
that Gentoo gives the user the option, as part of the installation
section, presumably thrown in with choosing the cron and syslog daemons,
etc.

Then I'd do the PR thing as you mention, pointing out that it's in the
handbook now, so new users will likely be installing it, and to avoid
skewing the numbers toward the new installations, existing installations
should consider it as well. Existing users aren't likely to want the
focus to shift to packages only the noobs are likely to install, for
instance. Setup a bit of a competition there, and I'd guess you're
likely to get better buy-in from existing users.

I'd leave the USE flag dependency out of it, at least initially. It
could always be added later, if thought necessary. But I suspect that if
it's presented well in the handbook, many new users will install it, and
if that fact is pointed out to existing users in appropriate forum/list
threads, etc, many existing users will as well, just to "keep up",
statistically. Yet if it's a separate package that must be separately
installed, there's no way people can say it wasn't their choice, as they
might be able to if it's a USE flag they weren't paying attention to,
particularly if that flag defaults on. Make it an active choice and
people are far more likely to continue with it, too, than if they felt in
any way that it was pushed on them, with little choice.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
 
Old 08-24-2011, 02:47 PM
Alec Warner
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Thomas Kahle <tomka@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Sorry, but NO. *If you want you can make a big noise message that asks
>> users to install the cron-job but opt-out is not an option here.
>
> Well, that's up to the Council/Trustees ultimately, but opinions (and
> better still reasoning) are welcome since both would no-doubt want to
> reflect the will of the community (and whatever is legal in the
> jurisdictions that matter).

It doesn't take a council vote nor a trustees vote to add a package to
everyone's machine.

In the end I'd recommend just looking at the opt-in numbers. Is the
data useful from opt-in users?
If the answer is no, then we can always think up other ways to get
more users. Will auto-installs be on the list of ideas? You bet But
I think we are putting the cart before the horse.

>
> One option that many distros employ is a forced opt-in/out decision.
> During the install process they simply ask the user, and they have to
> hit either yes or no to continue. *The reason most people don't opt-in
> is that they don't think about it, and this forces the issue.
>
> The Gentoo analogue would be to put something in make.conf or whatever
> that must be set one way or another. *Maybe have an opt-in use flag
> and an opt-out use flag and if you don't set either emerge just dies
> with a notice or something. *No doubt somebody could come up with a
> more elegant solution.

The stage3 tarball doesn't even come with a dhcp client; so I don't
really see how installing a stats client makes sense from the
standpoint of 'only what is necessary.' For many people, that is an
important part of Gentoo (cf. python3...)

Making emerge die unless you make a decision will probably break a
bunch of shit (plenty of people have automatic installs in some
fashion.) We would have to use an existing methodology to avoid
breaking them (PROPERTIES=interactive?)

>
> Maybe another line of discussion that could inform the debate is what
> the value of this information is? *For a company, knowing what
> packages are popular helps them to allocate resources. *Gentoo is a
> volunteer effort and devs allocate their effort based on personal
> preference, though perhaps some would care about package popularity to
> an extent. *So, we might not benefit to the same degree from this kind
> of information, since we can't crack the whip and force people to fix
> some broken package that is popular.

I think at present we don't know the informations value; that is part
of why considering opt-out is premature

>
> Rich
>
>
 
Old 08-25-2011, 08:33 AM
Michał Górny
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:03:44 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Am Mittwoch 24 August 2011, 12:48:35 schrieb Patrick Lauer:
> >
> > If you sneakily add something to cron.daily by default you can get
> > pretty nice coverage. But I guess anyone trying that in Gentooland
> > will meet some rather unpleasant resistance
> >
>
> Of course, we could place it in some blatantly obvious way into a
> default configuration, together with a big fat message what it does
> and how to quickly disable it.
>
> We'd get better coverage in an opt-out system than in an opt-in
> system.

And a larger number of angry users which missed the warning and now
have to pay for additional GPRS transfer or so. And when people use
GPRS rarely, they usually don't think about random apps that use
the connection in background.

> (First idea- package is pulled in by a default-on useflag and
> installs itself into cron.daily. BEFORE it runs the first time it
> outputs said message and asks for permission to proceed (which cannot
> be done in the cron job obviously but we'd find a way).)

And what if it can't ask for that? Assuming you're talking about
'opt-out', I guess the fallback would be to 'yes'. We don't want to end
up like Windows, where you get AFK for five minutes and then discover
the system has rebooted.

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
 
Old 08-25-2011, 10:42 AM
Nikos Chantziaras
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

On 08/24/2011 01:48 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:

[...]
If you sneakily add something to cron.daily by default you can get
pretty nice coverage. But I guess anyone trying that in Gentooland will
meet some rather unpleasant resistance


emerge always asks me after a world update whether I want to "auto clean
packages" with a yes/no prompt. I wouldn't be bad if once a month or
whatever it would ask me whether I want to upload my stats. Gentoostats
should probably become a runtime dep of Portage itself by default, but
not used automatically.
 
Old 08-25-2011, 10:48 AM
Roy Bamford
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

On 2011.08.24 11:48, Patrick Lauer wrote:
[snip]
>
> If you sneakily add something to cron.daily by default you can get
> pretty nice coverage. But I guess anyone trying that in Gentooland
> will
> meet some rather unpleasant resistance
>
>
>
>

This app and if its opt in or opt out will set a precedence for any
future apps that want automatic user feedback in Gentoo

It has to be opt-in as opt out would be a dangerous precendent to set.

I don't see any harm is a gentle reminder message from emerge, provided
that the reminder can be turned off too, if the user really does not
want to opt in. Thats no worse than being nagged about unread news.

--
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees
 
Old 08-25-2011, 12:20 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org> wrote:
> It has to be opt-in as opt out would be a dangerous precendent to set.
>
> I don't see any harm is a gentle reminder message from emerge, provided
> that the reminder can be turned off too, if the user really does not
> want to opt in. Thats no worse than being nagged about unread news.

I tend to agree, the more I think about it.

The simplest solution (which doesn't require any portage mods/etc), is
to simply make this a package that installs the appropriate logic in
cron.daily, and we send out a news item encouraging users to install
it voluntarily. If the user does nothing, they don't get the package.

If somebody can come up with really good reason that we should be more
aggressive in promoting it, then we can promote it more aggressively.
That /might/ go as far as a forced opt-in/out decision. However, the
more I think about it the more I'm concerned with pure opt-out by
default.

The big issue with opt-out is privacy law - especially in Europe
(that's leaving aside just being up-front with users). We'd end up
having to have EULAs or such and perhaps a number of other legal
controls, and I don't think that is a direction that we want to go in.
I'm just not seeing the upside - better to just figure out good ways
to use data that is easy and safe to obtain first.

Earlier somebody suggested that this decision wasn't really in the
domain of the Council/Trustees. I'm not sure I agree here - any kind
of opt-out data collection is something that has potential legal
ramifications as well as huge reputation concerns for the distro (the
software is distributed from Foundation-owned hardware utilizing a
Foundation-owned domain name and the data goes back to
Foundation-owned hardware - I'm sure any lawyer could make a case for
this). Just because there isn't a policy written down somewhere
doesn't mean that we can't use common sense. Devs certainly don't
need to run everything past the Council, but if you want to do
something high-profile post it on -dev, and if there is an uproar look
for an official second opinion before doing it.

Rich
 
Old 08-25-2011, 12:43 PM
Markos Chandras
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 25/08/2011 11:42 ??, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 08/24/2011 01:48 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> [...] If you sneakily add something to cron.daily by default you
>> can get pretty nice coverage. But I guess anyone trying that in
>> Gentooland will meet some rather unpleasant resistance
>
> emerge always asks me after a world update whether I want to "auto
> clean packages" with a yes/no prompt. I wouldn't be bad if once a
> month or whatever it would ask me whether I want to upload my
> stats. Gentoostats should probably become a runtime dep of Portage
> itself by default, but not used automatically.
>
>
I like your idea and people seem to like making things complicated.
Simple solution:

opt-in

How:
Display a warning after an emerge -u{DNav} world.
Let user disable this warning by using a special variable in make.conf

STATS_ENABLE="no".

By default, this variable will be "yes" on base/ profiles

- --
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOVkNbAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCWFEP+wSHLeGuqIGIV1OcHzlrgMJn
qBusQcvWb2SbP58G+3hndPUHWsnSIRDk2zws21wZH1DLaCr3Hy c5V9s8WM7HMWeX
WHgLVN71KDSmhREvz9fJWGA08rLJHa/Xs3XdNBUp5mMGsogPmwgEmNgSyfpKe6wC
nsBC6pk/R6kvAdlinyLp2uybBDI00GtiUSN3fyvvuoE3XMlVdyYLYTKTgu VmJB4A
aR97bIR2otZlWTmSGMvr899vht35Mwoe0/UHDV2SJHtWk9zzIYzWHEW9mMUoWAAw
1/2bYAafE+rp0/MPTv0tJ8WtoB6NhpJBRZGa5MuQM0V8jQqbgweq1YBO4zO8VAO+
tn6/thWk+heSklzTR1Uom1F+pYMxJBY0nBQUQ6ppZLjOM43WTT5TmP kc/rYwEB3M
8FywLV+Mryax+nQesLkgMQLLKUSuQygy+4zxoCUHkY5DwB08C5 dfYua/Y+nLbb0l
iCmCNpYSKUJF2cbHm6kDfOonsyfre//+JNvycxuz5J932XqFwkv7dM8ywSwP7Srw
FfWWspLfHxyoXSHlljwXj0UxfQcjNbg3MyUt8s0pSys9GlUzdS v1vx4xGgS8dtzA
zTSvTE1xO3fUzO1Au+KaSs0GC49BO7Gf1fWFdIhr8ZcJD82+jD aooompzPqFm0lB
XZQAVwslAMQbSaJAEfCY
=V+cS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Old 08-25-2011, 02:15 PM
Patrick Nagel
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

On 2011-08-25 20:43, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 25/08/2011 11:42 ??, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> On 08/24/2011 01:48 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>> [...] If you sneakily add something to cron.daily by default you can
>>> get pretty nice coverage. But I guess anyone trying that in
>>> Gentooland will meet some rather unpleasant resistance
>
>> emerge always asks me after a world update whether I want to "auto
>> clean packages" with a yes/no prompt. I wouldn't be bad if once a
>> month or whatever it would ask me whether I want to upload my stats.
>> Gentoostats should probably become a runtime dep of Portage itself by
>> default, but not used automatically.
>
> I like your idea and people seem to like making things complicated.
> Simple solution:
>
> opt-in
>
> How: Display a warning after an emerge -u{DNav} world. Let user disable
> this warning by using a special variable in make.conf
>
> STATS_ENABLE="no".
>
> By default, this variable will be "yes" on base/ profiles

That sounds perfect to me.

The prompt should offer three options:

[s]end the data directly
s[h]ow me the data*
s[k]ip

You can disable this prompt by having either 'SEND_STATS="yes"' (to always
send) or 'SEND_STATS="no" (to never send) in your /etc/make.conf.

*) And in the next step, after showing the data set(s): Send? [y/n]

(why do all those words have to start with an 's'??)

Cheers,
Patrick.

- --
Key ID: 0x86E346D4 http://patrick-nagel.net/key.asc
Fingerprint: 7745 E1BE FA8B FBAD 76AB 2BFC C981 E686 86E3 46D4
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5WWPoACgkQyYHmhobjRtSwewCgyJzgsLLvjf ZpX5vg8XcxkNMb
tg8AoIkHz1z6b9DxTrnJxe3YyTDMOYsr
=ZKYx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Old 08-25-2011, 02:35 PM
Alec Warner
 
Default Gentoostats, SoC 2011

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> It has to be opt-in as opt out would be a dangerous precendent to set.
>>
>> I don't see any harm is a gentle reminder message from emerge, provided
>> that the reminder can be turned off too, if the user really does not
>> want to opt in. Thats no worse than being nagged about unread news.
>
> I tend to agree, the more I think about it.
>
> The simplest solution (which doesn't require any portage mods/etc), is
> to simply make this a package that installs the appropriate logic in
> cron.daily, and we send out a news item encouraging users to install
> it voluntarily. *If the user does nothing, they don't get the package.
>
> If somebody can come up with really good reason that we should be more
> aggressive in promoting it, then we can promote it more aggressively.
> That /might/ go as far as a forced opt-in/out decision. *However, the
> more I think about it the more I'm concerned with pure opt-out by
> default.

Why is the thread bikeshedding an out-opt that we aren't even
considering doing right now?

>
> The big issue with opt-out is privacy law - especially in Europe
> (that's leaving aside just being up-front with users). *We'd end up
> having to have EULAs or such and perhaps a number of other legal
> controls, and I don't think that is a direction that we want to go in.
> *I'm just not seeing the upside - better to just figure out good ways
> to use data that is easy and safe to obtain first.
>
> Earlier somebody suggested that this decision wasn't really in the
> domain of the Council/Trustees. *I'm not sure I agree here - any kind
> of opt-out data collection is something that has potential legal
> ramifications as well as huge reputation concerns for the distro (the
> software is distributed from Foundation-owned hardware utilizing a
> Foundation-owned domain name and the data goes back to
> Foundation-owned hardware - I'm sure any lawyer could make a case for
> this). *Just because there isn't a policy written down somewhere
> doesn't mean that we can't use common sense. *Devs certainly don't
> need to run everything past the Council, but if you want to do
> something high-profile post it on -dev, and if there is an uproar look
> for an official second opinion before doing it.

We did post to -dev, hence this thread. The point is that we don't
need any 'official opinion' to do anything; and I don't want to set
that precedent. If you have specific concerns about actions we plan to
take (which by the way, we are not planning an opt-out solution. If we
plan to do an opt-out solution, we will again have a thread on -dev)
then let us know. If you have specific legal concerns about the
application, data retention, encryption, logs, backups, onerous
european privacy laws, and other such questions you should raise those
concerns now.

>
> Rich
>
>
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:31 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org