20111212

Meeting started by roadmr at 16:01:37 UTC. The full logs are available at http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2011/ubuntu-meeting.2011-12-12-16.01.log.html .

Meeting summary

  • Progress report on new Checkbox (System Testing client) user interface.
  • Any Other Business

Meeting ended at 16:51:00 UTC.

Votes

Action items

  • (none)

People present (lines said)

  • roadmr (79)
  • cr3 (34)
  • jedimike (19)
  • meetingology (3)

Full Log

  • 16:01:37 <roadmr> #startmeeting Ubuntu Friendly Meeting

    16:01:37 <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Dec 12 16:01:37 2011 UTC. The chair is roadmr. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot.

    16:01:37 <meetingology>

    16:01:37 <meetingology> Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired

    16:02:06 <roadmr> Hi all! Welcome to the Ubuntu Friendly meeting!

    16:02:29 <roadmr> We only have a small topic on the Agenda today, but please remember, if there's anything at all you'd like to discuss, just let me know.

    16:02:38 <roadmr> Our agenda for today includes:

    16:02:52 <roadmr> Progress report on new Checkbox (System Testing client) user interface.

    16:02:52 <roadmr> Any Other Business

    16:03:06 <roadmr> Let's get started with our first topic!

    16:03:18 <roadmr> [TOPIC] Progress report on new Checkbox (System Testing client) user interface.

    16:03:42 <roadmr> So if you've run the Ubuntu Friendly tests, you're no doubt familiar with Checkbox.

    16:03:51 <roadmr> Although good enough for most needs, the UI is lovably quirky and the way it is built limits the improvements we can easily make.

    16:04:03 <roadmr> Since we were looking at a major overhaul, it was decided to create a new UI module for checkbox, to implement the new features we want and have room to improve it more easily.

    16:04:14 <roadmr> There are both a new UI design in general, and a number of specific suggestions we received from the community during Ubuntu Friendly testing.

    16:04:30 <roadmr> Ideally we'd like to incorporate these in the User Interface. Remember that we welcome ideas on specific pain points or interface quirks you'd like to see taken care of.

    16:05:18 <roadmr> The UF mailing list is probably a good place for this, we like receiving stuff on the ML!

    16:05:31 <roadmr> The one new thing about the UI is that, thanks to help from Ugo Riboni and Tiago Herrmann's expertise, there's already some progress in implementing a checkbox UI in Qt \o/

    16:05:44 <roadmr> For now work has gone into recreating the existing Checkbox UI in Qt, both for Tiago to get to know Checkbox and for us to get to know Qt Smile :)

    16:05:55 <roadmr> But in the near future (days, I expect), we'll refocus into creating the new Checkbox UI with what has been learned.

    16:06:09 <roadmr> I'll check with Tiago to see if we can make a branch public for you all to see, although at this stage it's mostly an experiment.

    16:06:24 <roadmr> Once we start actually implementing the new UI, we'll let you all know and follow along on the progress.

    16:06:49 <roadmr> ... I guess that's it as far as progress on the UI goes!

    16:07:02 <roadmr> Any comments or questions about this? Smile :)

    16:08:37 <roadmr> nothing? Smile :)

    16:09:28 <jedimike> o/

    16:09:34 <roadmr> jedimike: go ahead!

    16:10:00 <jedimike> a new ui for checkbox is exciting, and I'd like to see a UI purely for ubunu friendly

    16:10:05 <jedimike> it would consist of one button

    16:10:16 <jedimike> that says "Run the ubuntu friendly tests"

    16:10:29 <jedimike> to make sure we run everything we need

    16:10:50 <jedimike> and still allow people to use the more detailed UI for running checkbox in the way they've been accustomed to

    16:10:51 <jedimike> ..

    16:11:02 <cr3> o/

    16:11:10 <roadmr> jedimike, good suggestion!

    16:11:16 <roadmr> cr3: you go

    16:11:30 <cr3> I might be inclined to agree with jedimike to have an Ubuntu Friendly specific client, but only if we can provide a link to Ubuntu Friendly at the end of the run

    16:11:33 <cr3> ..

    16:12:12 <jedimike> o/

    16:12:14 <roadmr> noted, the "press this big button to do Ubuntu Friendly testing" approach sounds like the most intuitive way to tackle it

    16:12:20 <roadmr> jedimike: heh, go ahead!

    16:13:12 <jedimike> cr3: agreed, the UI for UF should be focussed on the friendly aspect, and shouldn't present anything more than is needed to run UF, and present UF info that the usual system testing checkbox ui doesn't

    16:13:46 <jedimike> ..

    16:14:12 <roadmr> oh so we're now talking about two UIs!

    16:14:37 <cr3> o/

    16:14:43 <roadmr> cr3, go

    16:15:06 <cr3> there seems to be much demand for slightly varying UIs: checkbox, friendly, certification, unity, etc.

    16:15:27 <jedimike> o/

    16:15:35 <cr3> I've been thinking of refactoring the checbox core: 1. to remove plugins; 2. to replace them with a job driven UI

    16:16:02 <cr3> so, the introduction screen should be specified as: plugin: interface; name introduction; description; welcome to Ubuntu Friendly...

    16:16:06 <cr3> ..

    16:16:37 <roadmr> cr3: well in principle people can come up with their own Checkbox frontends, but that way it'd be easier for them to do.

    16:16:42 <roadmr> jedimike: your turn!

    16:16:45 <cr3> just in case the outcome wasn't clear: a different UI would simply mean a different whitelist Smile :)

    16:17:20 <jedimike> it just seems to me like system testing would be for testing your system, the UF interface would be to participate in the ubuntu friendly program. While the testing backend is checkbox in both cases, the intentions and requirements are different, so a different, simpler UI for UF seems to be a good fit, from my view

    16:17:23 <jedimike> ...

    16:18:30 <roadmr> jedimike: yep agreed on that, and also the UI would probably share a lot of components. For this I liked the Gtk approach where you can come up with prefabricated "panels" or pieces and just bring them in as needed

    16:18:42 <roadmr> jedimike: I guess Qt can do the same

    16:19:12 <roadmr> OK so it's something to consider for when actual work starts on the new UI, which should really be within the next few days.

    16:19:29 <cr3> roadmr: I suspect the user_interface api should be sufficient for both intents and purposes, friendly and system testing

    16:19:53 <roadmr> cr3: yep, it should be

    16:20:54 <roadmr> we do need to come up with actual user stories and storyboards for the UI, something more detailed than the mockups we have

    16:21:03 <roadmr> I'll keep everyone posted on this via the mailing list

    16:21:40 <roadmr> anything else on this topic? Smile :)

    16:22:12 <cr3> o/

    16:22:27 <roadmr> cr3: go ahead!

    16:22:39 <cr3> it sounds like this request for a UF interface is very similar to the one expressed by the Unity folks

    16:23:11 <cr3> the motivation being that changing the interface will result in more user testing

    16:23:30 <cr3> I would like to question that motivation and perhaps get some validation that the problem is really the interface

    16:24:04 <cr3> so, in addition to mockups, could we also do somekind of market research to justify that what we're doing will actually result in better numbers?

    16:24:07 <cr3> ..

    16:24:51 <roadmr> cr3: quite a valid point.

    16:25:14 <roadmr> cr3: to be fair, the UI work to be done for checkbox is in direct response to user feedback

    16:25:51 <roadmr> cr3: but I agree that we should be sure about the "ROI" before committing a lot of resources to this

    16:26:20 <roadmr> cr3: getting rid of annoyances like "closing the checkbox window ends the testing run, no questions asked" is one thing

    16:26:40 <cr3> roadmr: we should either get those numbers prior or at least plan to get them afterwards in the current case where we already committed to investing resources

    16:26:45 <roadmr> cr3: but changing stuff without a real justification is probably not good

    16:26:52 <cr3> roadmr: that's a bug, not a preference Smile :)

    16:27:40 <roadmr> cr3: a preference is just a user-configurable bug Smile :)

    16:27:53 <cr3> roadmr: actually, I misunderstood that as the checkbox window closing after each test. it might be a preference but I think it's been justified by plenty of user feedback

    16:28:32 <roadmr> cr3: no, if you click on the "x" to close the checkbox window by mistake, it just closes, no "are you sure you want to abandon the test run?", no nothing

    16:28:41 <roadmr> I know cuz I've done it Sad :(

    16:28:57 <cr3> roadmr: right, I remember now, just read too fast the first time around Smile :)

    16:30:09 <roadmr> cr3: yep, it might be reasonable to depict feature requests as user stories, the "so I can..." thing is very good at distilling the intent behind a particular feature request

    16:31:14 <roadmr> awesome feedback on this topic!

    16:31:28 <roadmr> anything else for this?

    16:32:06 <roadmr> OK let's move on then

    16:32:15 <cr3> roadmr: I see bugs like the one you mentionned as a cost center because it won't necessarily translate into more submissions, we may want to start thinking of improvements as profit centers that translate into more submissions

    16:32:23 <cr3> roadmr: ie, express the user stories you mentionned that way

    16:33:23 <roadmr> cr3: sounds like a good idea! Though I can envision a submission being "lost" because a user lost its patience and decided not to restart the test run after mistakenly closing checkbox Sad :(

    16:33:49 <roadmr> cr3: if fixing the bug helps us "recover" those submissions, that may be worthwhile to fix

    16:34:17 <cr3> roadmr: sure, as long as it's expressed in such a way that leads to more submissions rather than just stories about people using checkbox in various ways without a purpose Smile :)

    16:34:39 <roadmr> cr3: agree 100%, sounds like a useful way to constrain the stories to make them more useful

    16:35:02 <roadmr> ok then, let's move on!

    16:35:03 <cr3> roadmr: exactly, it might even help us priorities the stories

    16:35:46 <roadmr> cr3: yes, highest submission value first Smile :)

    16:35:55 <roadmr> [TOPIC] Any Other Business

    16:36:05 <roadmr> Got anything you want to discuss? Anything Ubuntu Friendly related goes.

    16:37:21 <jedimike> o/

    16:37:39 <roadmr> jedimike: go!

    16:38:31 <jedimike> I'd like to get some feedback on the homepage. At the moment it's just listings, starting with the highest rated systems. I'd like to know what people would like to see, if they'd like something different, or if they like how it is.

    16:38:32 <jedimike> ...

    16:39:00 <cr3> o/

    16:39:05 <roadmr> cr3: go ahead

    16:39:57 <cr3> jedimike: I think people could argue that when a listing becomes large enough, just showing a small subset on the home page is useless.

    16:40:14 <roadmr> o/

    16:40:15 <cr3> jedimike: the reason is probably because that list becomes stale at some point, always the same small subset is shown

    16:40:33 <jedimike> o/

    16:40:37 <cr3> jedimike: so, people tend to provide more active information, like "lastest hardware" or something like that

    16:40:57 <cr3> jedimike: perhaps we've reached enough hardware to make it worthwhile to consider other options at this point

    16:41:00 <cr3> .

    16:41:02 <cr3> .

    16:41:30 <roadmr> roadmr, you go

    16:41:54 <roadmr> thanks! heh, one problem I see is that the listing is somehow not turning up the way we expected it to

    16:42:11 <roadmr> meaning that we see a lot of systems with very few ratings, rather than a large sample per-system

    16:42:22 <roadmr> so yes, the ones that get 5 stars tend to always be the same

    16:42:34 <roadmr> the "latest systems tested" section would be interesting to have

    16:42:51 <roadmr> also, we could come up with a "spotlight" and rotate systems that have tested well, even though they may be a bit further down the list

    16:43:20 <roadmr> finally, I saw some comments about how the home page just throws the listing into your face, assuming you know a priori what it is about

    16:43:40 <roadmr> so maybe a short explanation blurb on the front page could help

    16:44:09 <roadmr> "UF lists systems that are known to work well with ubuntu, yadda yadda, want to know more? click up there. Or just go straight into the listing"

    16:44:40 <roadmr> that'd probably be easy enough to add and we could gauge how people feel about it. How to gauge? well I don't know yet Sad :(

    16:44:43 <roadmr> ..

    16:45:41 <cr3> jedimike: go ahead Smile :)

    16:46:15 <jedimike> just wanted to say if anyone in the community had ideas, wanted to do some mockups, or anything like that, I'd welcome the input Smile :)

    16:46:16 <jedimike> ..

    16:46:37 <cr3> jedimike: I like this mockup: http://www.ubuntu.com/certification

    16:47:14 <cr3> jedimike: just kidding, except for the blurb, the rest of the page doesn't necessarily translate well to UF

    16:48:08 <roadmr> OK! remember that the mailing list is open and probably a good place for that kind of feedback and suggestions

    16:48:54 <roadmr> anything else? any other business?

    16:49:25 <roadmr> nothing? Smile :) Going once...

    16:49:41 <roadmr> Going twice...

    16:50:03 <roadmr> Well, looks like we're done, but please remember the mailing list is there if you ever want to discuss a topic, suggest an idea, or bring something to the Ubuntu Friendly Squad's attention.

    16:50:30 <roadmr> I guess that's it for today then, thanks all for attending! And see you here next monday (December 19th) at the same time.

    16:51:00 <roadmr> #endmeeting

Generated by MeetBot 0.1.5 (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AlanBell/mootbot)

UbuntuFriendly/Meetings/20111212 (last edited 2011-12-19 16:19:17 by roadmr)