On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 03:30:10AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > Well, the first (only!) time they will install apt/dpkg on a system is > during the dbootstrap in debian-installer. I'd object very strongly if > such a question were asked by d-i. Debconf is doable, but it'd have to why would you object? yes, it's another question that they'd be asked during an install phase full of questions, but that's exactly when the installer would want to know this preference (i.e. before it dropped them into dselect for the first time). also, they'd only be asked once. > be a priority low default no question --- in which case, most people > wouldn't see it. And those that would see it probably already know how > to look. In general, I don't see preferences as an excuse for bad user > interface. (I hate those "don't show this dialog next time" checkboxes, > but that's a rant for another thread.) well, i hate those when i get them uninvited (cue the paperclip asking me if i'm writing a letter), but if i've explicitly asked for it, i'd like to know how to turn it off. > However, an approach that is *much* better user interface comes to > mind: Give dselect/aptitude/etc. a key binding to show alternatives > (this is even more general!) and even display a small note at the > bottom of the description: i don't think these ideas are mutually exclusive. i think that that would be really nice feature. and how about adding an apt-cache free-alternatives packagename while we're at it? > I hope you'll agree that is much better user interface. well, considering i don't use anything more than a command line for my admin'ing, so i won't agree it's a better, but like i said, i think it's a nice idea and folks who use them would probably find it useful. also, i second the motion on giving a splash screen with the licenses from non-free, as well as making it clear to the users that non-free is not an official part of debian (throw in some social contract) _but still provided_ as a simple courtesy, and defaulting to not using it. i think removing the software on idealogical principles is a little heavy handed and unnecessary, at leat at present, because if you want a pure-free-software OS, all you have to do is not update from non-free! I realize that the social contract states it's debian's goal to provide a completely free OS, and imho they already do that, and more. regards, sean
Attachment:
pgpwFzDelZ0dV.pgp
Description: PGP signature