[lug] Ubuntu users: request for topics for articles

[Davide Del Vento]

Ok, so here are my suggestions.

But first, my backgrounds: I started using linux on desktops in 1998,
and on laptops in 2002. I started using linux servers only in 2007.
I worked with the following distributions (not in any particular
order): Mandrake (the old one), Mandriva (only a couple of releases
after mandrake was renamed), RedHat (the old one), RedHat EL (the new
one), Fedora, Ubuntu. I used a little bit also Debian and Gentoo, I
liked them, but I gave up because of drivers problem. I tried but
didn't like Slackware, Suse, Mint and many less-known others.
Having updated many times with troubles, I do NOT update anymore. I
just install from scratch in a different partition (I do save home
directories, of course, but I don't let two different installation use
the same home directories, so technically I always install from
scratch in an empty space - then possibly migrate data). If something
goes wrong, I just boot the "old" distro untouched (at most I have to
rebuild the boot sector). I just can't afford to be stuck by a problem
in the update, especially on my work machine.

That said, the best thing that I like in Ubuntu is LTS. My "previous
favorite" distribution was Fedora, but I switched when I was unable to
update in time, and I was left for several months without security
updates. LTS is the most import reason why I left Fedora: the 6 months
release schedule is crazy, I cannot follow that pace at all. I might
always "skip a release" (like I was doing), but that means that I have
only a single month and I might be very busy in that particular month.
And even one installation per year is almost a crazy schedule, IMHO.

Compare this http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle
with the much less stressful (for LTS):
http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/serveredition/benefits/lifecycle
LTS does not mean only Long Term Support, but also "large overlap of
subsequent LTS releases", giving plenty of time to get the new release
up and running, before the old one is gone. Lot of time to breath and
actually do my job instead of only "installing, installing, installing
and if you don't install right now that's your last chance, you might
be screwed up".

You might say that from my point of view I should use Debian-stable,
RHEL or other slow-paced distribution. This is not the case, for two
reasons: first hw support for Debian-stable, RHEL and many others is
awful, especially on laptops. Second, software on these is waaaaaaay
too old for being useful. This sometimes is true for Ubuntu LTS too,
but while almost everything I need is not "new enough" in RHEL (I did
not retry Debian-stable seriously, recently, because of hw troubles),
just a couple of packages in Ubuntu LTS were too old for my purposes.
Of course YMMV, especially if you do lot of bleeding-edge development
and you tend to install packages from /trunk or (on the other side)
you just need a "very stable, without latest faddish things" system.
Ubuntu is just the happy medium for me. But that's not just me: many
of my friends moved to Ubuntu (from various distributions) exactly for
this reason.

A possible article might cover this "philosophic" approach to Ubuntu LTSes.

I wrote this long foreword also to pinpoint a particular Ubuntu's
users group, to which I belong and which I call the "average
Linux-on-laptop developer". You might want to target this group.
Then there is the other large group of Ubuntu's user, which I think
you shouldn't target: inexperienced linux users, moved to Ubuntu by
its easiness of use (I say that you shouldn't target because there is
already lot of docs for them, so the competition is tough, and they
might move back to windows or mac and forget about you, whereas the
other target is a more faithful audience).

Another thing that I like, is the one that annoy you: it hides things
to avoid that you shoot yourself in the foot. In fact, you can always,
very easily, unhide things you need to control more (or shoot your
foot, if it itches). For example I replied to a guy saing that
services can be started/stopped from a menu. Well, I checked and you
can do the same command-line (CLI) with /etc/init.d/ scripts, e.g.
sudo /etc/init.d/cupsys start
sudo /etc/init.d/apached stop

So, what would I like to read about?

I already mentioned the "philosophic" approach to LTS Ubuntu.

Another possibility is services: from the menu' when nothing special
is required (dumbproof, just a paragraph and a screenshot) to more
advanced CLI options for special purposes, possibly with some examples
of "special purposes" (e.g. cron, ssh, scripts with conditionals, etc)

This dual-approach (only a paragraph + screenshot for the menu' "easy"
then the rest of the article on the serious stuff) might work for
almost anything you'll write about Ubuntu

Another interesting stuff (and not Ubuntu specific at all) would be
apt. Given years spent with rpm, I still don't understand all the
options of apt-*
Sure, you can use synaptic or UpdateManager or AddRemove, but
sometimes (less often than in the past), you might want to do sometime
CLI. Not just a "sudo apt-get install foobar", but maybe something
like "check the owner of a given file in the filesystem and find all
the other files that belong to the same package". Or the likes. I am
able to do that with rpm, but not with apt (well, unless I spent
several minutes reading the manual and/or the web). Since you surely
master rpm like I do, a side-by-side comparison might be a
particularly interesting topic, and it might even interest
Fedora's/RH's people.

Another suggestion is closely related with my "don't upgrede" policy.
How could I "export" the status of the installed packages of my Ubuntu
Hardy and use it to install a *different* version of Ubuntu,
automatically installing all the stuff that I already have? Is there a
quick, safe and automatic way of doing that? And even more difficult:
how can I "export" all the settings, in order to not having to
re-configure everything? Of course this part of the reason why I don't
upgrade in the first place: old settings with new apps might break, so
this should be quick, safe, automatic but easily controlled and
undo-able (what I used from the old settings? did I change it, at
least partially? when? ok, it's broken, dump it and restart like I
never used the old settings for this particular application)
Maybe puppet can do that, but I suspect that it works properly only
when I'm using the SAME system on two machines. Here I'm using two
different systems (one newer, one older) on the same machine.

Last, I re-mention the bug-tracking that I wrote in another email.
Another "political" issue.

Finally: email. Since when I had my laptop stolen while I was in
Italy, I switched to web-only emails  (mostly on gmail, of which I was
early adopter when it was still close). Now, per employer policy, I
have to use a local client. I'm using thunerbird and I'm hating it.
How can I switch between HTML and plaintext on a per-message basis?
The option is very deep into tons of menus! How can I reply-all
INCLUDING the original attachments? I know the sender already has
them, but I need to include a couple of additional recipients that
missed it. It happens all the time in business! How can I forward a
message without disrupting the thread view? How can I change from
reply to reply-all without losing (or having to cut-n-paste) what I
already typed? The latter is particularly useful when I'm typing while
holding my 10-months daughter: I reply and delete the recipient, so
that she cannot send the email while I type (she bats her hands on the
laptop). With gmail, at the end the "final send" is just two click:
reply and send. With thunderbird I have to cut-n-paste, refind the
original message, reply, paste and send. I can't believe that people
can live with this: there should be something I missed (maybe a
plugin?)

I think for now it's enough,

Thanks,
;Dav

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 09:59, Michael J.
Hammel<mjhammel at graphics-muse.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 20:59 -0600, Davide Del Vento wrote:
>> I found a little silly that you say: "I don't like Ubuntu, and I'd
>> like to know what Ubuntu users are complaining about, so I can write
>> good article about it" (I know, I'm exaggerating what you said, it's
>> on purpose).
>> I think that as a first step you should know why users LIKE Ubuntu.
>> And I mean experienced users, not dumb windows users.
>
> That's fine. Like or dislike, its helpful to know what users need to
> know more about.
>
>> A very quick suggestion is that Ubuntu articles usually are tailored
>> to dumb windows users, while more advanced documentation is missing (I
>> know, you can use generic linux or debian one....)
>
> I'm all for that.
>
>> That said, what is your timeline? I can answer, but I need some time
>> to elaborate (during the week).  Is it ok for you?
>
> No timeline yet.  They're just looking for future material.  So I'm
> going to put together a proposal for a number of articles.
>