[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: 'IT Security' in comps?

Till Maas (opensource till name) said: 
> The IT prefix is only used in the group id, which is afaik not visible
> to the used and not translated.

No, it's not just in the description.

"These tools can be used to perform IT security related wireless auditing."

In this example, "IT security related" (aside from missing a hyphen
or two) is completely superfluous.

> I don't understand what you want to say
> with "password recovery" is "password recovery". There is nothing to
> argue about, but nevertheles the groups are related to each other,

How so? aide is not really related to password recovery at all,
at least not in any generally describable way.

> already expresses itself that they are all on the security spin. Also it
> allows other people to easier ignore them, instead of cluttering other
> categories.

Put it this way:

- These packages are all in other groups under 'Base System'
- Ergo, if they're being grouped together, the resulting group
  should still be under 'Base System'

> > Tagging would help with this; as it stands now, 'yum search wireless'
> > or 'yum search wireless sniffer' would return the packages in your
> > wireless group.
> Probably, but this cannot be done right now afaik.

yum search certainly can be done now.

> > Moreover, what's the usage case in that you really need all three
> > tools (which is the default if you install the group you mentioned)?
> Everyone on a multi user system can use the tool of his preference.


So, the goal of this is for a multi-user forensic system, where
you have multiple users working on the same system su-ing to root
and running the tools of their choice? That's an odd usage case
to design for by default.

> Also
> there may be a feature in one application, that is missing in another.

Then fix one app so that it's reasonable enough. To quote Adam Jackson:

"Choice is not the goal. We have many interesting problems to solve and
forcing the user to care about their choice of solutions is both bad UI
and actively detracts from the real goal, which is making it work out
of the box and enabling people to work on the really cool stuff at the

In comps, in most any group, the default item is the best-of-breed app;
other implementations are optional.

> Btw. I fail to understand what trouble this is causing you. Thanks to
> bundling all together into one category, it will even disturb you less
> than six (or more) groups in some other category, where the stuff you
> are interested is.

It's about not presenting bad UI and bad groups to our users - it's 
a design thing.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]