nssbackup-team team mailing list archive

[Jean-Peer Lorenz <peer.loz@xxxxxxx>]

Hello,

Am Freitag, den 12.02.2010, 09:05 +0100 schrieb Ouattara Oumar Aziz:

> Can you give me a screenshot of what the general page became? I was
> thinking of moving settings to that page, but I was scared that I
> would become cluttered. BTW, be careful about this bug:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/nssbackup/+bug/364833 .

A screenshot of the UI is attached. The whole window has a size of
approx. 490 x 475 px. This should be ok, shouldn't it? And the max.
incr. setting is now accessable also for non-root users and non-default
profiles.

> > * I disabled the scheduling for non-default profiles since they can
> > overwrite schedule settings made in the default profile and this can be
> > very confusing.
> 
> Good point!

In addition to this the schedule page is shown for non-root users (it
was removed till now) again, however I've disabled the whole page (see
attachment). I think it is clearer for non-root users this way. I
remember questions that asked 'Where is the time tab?'. Really nice
would be an adaptive tooltip of the kind 'Scheduling is only for
admins.' when hovering over the page label.

In fact, I love tooltips. They are the best help in a new application
(if they contain something useful). Step by step :-)

> > These changes are not pushed upstream so far.

No longer true.

> The schedule feature is indeed messy. I didn't really take the time to
> review it correctly. I am happy that you could review it and simplify
> it.
> 
> I agree on the not so big difference between custom and precise.
> Removing precise will simplify a lot the code.

Ok, then I will do so. It wont break anything but simplifies a lot and
we release some space in the UI also.

> Agree. I didn't want to take that decision because I moved to RC. But
> we can rip off buggy features and release. Then move them in 0.3.

Yeah, I understand this but nssbackup is not such big project where
correct development cycles are the most important thing.

Let me tell you this: Since a few days I observe/collect the statistical
data for sbackup and nssbackup from Ubuntu Popcon and Debian Popcon.
Here is an excerpt from Ubuntu Popcon of today:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
#<name> is the package name;
#<inst> is the number of people who installed this package;
#<vote> is the number of people who use this package regularly;
#<old> is the number of people who installed, but don't use this package
#        regularly;
#<recent> is the number of people who upgraded this package recently;
#<no-files> is the number of people whose entry didn't contain enough
#        information (atime and ctime were 0).
#rank name              inst  vote   old recent no-files (maintainer)
3646  sbackup           54521  2497 51598   407    19 (Aigars Mahinovs)
37052 nssbackup           113     0    14     0    99 (Unknown)
37442 nssbackup-common    108    13    87     8     0 (Unknown)
37533 nssbackup-gtk       107     9    89     9     0 (Unknown)
37763 nssbackup-ssh       104     6    84    11     3 (Unknown)
37848 nssbackup-ftp       103     6    83    11     3 (Unknown)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You see, we are not that important ;-) Nevertheless, I was quite
surprised how many people are using sbackup regularly. (For me, it never
worked very well.) These users are the long-term target I suppose.
Targeted with a piece of good software. The 13 hardcore users of
nssbackup do understand if some 'bigger' changes are introduced in a RC,
I guess.


So long,
regards.

Jean-Peer

Attachment: nssbackup-config-gui.png
Description: PNG image

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil