On 29/08/2019 08:06, Lee Starnes wrote: This is a good format. Thank you. That paragraph serves as an introduction to the entire Opportunity section, so I feel it should stay. We are specifically targeting the sort of installation system that Windows Vista/7/8 had, not 10. Additionally, the macOS installer gives the user less choice than it did when it was Mac OS X. This may need to be clarified. The purpose of the on-line help system is to allow users to access said documentation. I feel it is unreasonable to time users *not* using the documentation we're providing for them. Random blogs, no. I was thinking online trade journals like LinuxPRO, Phoronix, etc. They are relative to the release of Project Horizon, which is the release date for Adélie 1.0. I don't believe that this detail is in scope for the vision document. We've just discussed this somewhat on #Adelie-Social, and everyone's definition of FDE allows for an unencrypted /boot. However, I have specifically noted that as Assumption ASM-4: ASM-4. "Full disk encryption" does not include the /boot partition. Not a whole lot I can do about that with DocBook, unfortunately. It has to be supported by easy-kernel to qualify for installation by Horizon. That said, yes, something like a BeagleBone. The project is not for-profit but will be significantly harmed from the financial losses incurred from a scheduling overrun. Will note for another revision; would take too much time for 1.0. I should be able to generate a single-page version. For 1.0, we won't have a terminal component. The UI will be graphical, as in requiring X11. GRUB works with UEFI, and also supports PowerPC and SPARC. We do need to consider U-Boot for ARM, so I've added that; thanks. All other issues identified in your message have been fixed. Thank you so much for your feedback! Best, --arw -- A. Wilcox (awilfox) Project Lead, Adélie Linux https://www.adelielinux.org

On 27/08/2019 23:17, A. Wilcox wrote: I'm collecting comments here from non-email sources, with citations where possible. Kiyoshi Aman (aerdan@): "It all looks good so far." (#Adelie IRC, 2019-08-28 00:04 CDT) Laurent Bercot (skarnet@): "It's a good document. It's useful." (#Adelie IRC, 2019-08-28 18:07 CDT) Alyx Wolcott (alyx@): "This looks like a huge step forward for Adélie, especially for adoption by a wider audience of users! ❤️" (Reddit; https://www.reddit.com/r/AdelieLinux/comments/cwfs96/project_vision_docum... ) Gavin Howard, author of POSIX bc(1), approved highly. I spoke with a self-described "Charlie", Tambra Wilcox, last night. After reading the spec she thought it was a great idea and covered most of the things she feels is important. She however wanted to emphasise that package selection is going to be important. She specifically referenced the UI used by Windows, seen here: http://screenshots.modemhelp.net/screenshots/Windows_98/Add-Remove_Progra... and noted that we could have something similar, though not a nested tree. Something like "KDE Games", "Multimedia", "Graphics and Design". This way, people can choose what packages matter to them. This morning I spoke with Jeremy Rand of Namecoin, who had a good idea re our question of offering non-libre firmware. We could offer it, with a note that people with enhanced threat models (activists, medical professionals, lawyers, etc) should not choose it. We could additionally offer media that does not provide the option (compile-time or such), for people who know they do not want it. Actually, my preference would be to have such a warning on both the download page and the installer itself. But that is more of an implementation detail than something that goes in the vision document; I'm just noting it here for later. I will be integrating this feedback, along with Lee and Max's, this evening. If anyone else has something to say, comment period ends in one hour - there's still time :) Best, --arw -- A. Wilcox (awilfox) Project Lead, Adélie Linux https://www.adelielinux.org

(The ML was down when I first sent this, so if you're seeing this again, you can just ignore it.) I have a lot of suggestions. I also don't write plain-text email often, so let me know if my formatting is bad. 1. "ArchLinux" should be "Arch Linux", which is the official naming. 2. The first sentence under "Opportunity" should start with saying that the existing installation systems don't meet users' needs, then the second sentence should outline what types of systems there are. 3. In that same section, replace "most, if not all, of" with "most or all". 4. It seems like the paragraph under "Opportunity" really goes more with the "Existing Systems" heading. Would it make sense to combine them into a single heading? 5. I think the first "Fixed" paragraph could read better: "The Alpine Linus installer is a set of interactive shell scripts that offers very few options. A user can choose between using a hard disk for the entire system or for data only, leaving the OS and software in a tmpfs. There is no option to use an existing partition map, nor to use an alternative to LVM2, nor to use RAID. Because it is a set of interactive shell scripts, it does not make sense to script an installation with it. Typically, users script a manual installation (such as in the "Manual" section below). There is no set of default packages: the installation routine only installs a minimal base system. There is also no support for IPv6 in the Alpine Linux installer, and IPv6 support is crucial for the modern Internet." 6. The second "Fixed" paragraph should not have "while not strictly Linux distributions". 7. I think the second-to-last sentence of "Batteries included" should use a colon instead of a semi-colon, but I don't remember style guides from school or college. 8. The paragraph about Anaconda uses the passive voice a lot, which makes it a little hard to read. 9. Instead of "the only manner supported of wireless network authentication was WEP, which is highly insecure", I would say "the only supported wireless network authentication mechanism was WEP, which is highly insecure and is usually not available on newer wireless networks". 10. For the sentence about Calamares, I'd change the last clause to "but we did not investigate it thoroughly during our requirements elicitation phase." 11. Windows 7 is almost end-of-life and Mac OS X was rebranded to OS X then macOS. I would change the end of the first sentence under "Where Our Solution Fits" to "such as Windows 10 or macOS". 12. "proceed to committing the installation" sounds jargony. I would write it as "perform the installation" or "execute the installation". 13. For "Objectives", should we specify whether objectives 1 or 2 must be able to be performed without access to documentation that is not included on the installation media? 14. For objectives 3 and 4, what constitutes a publication? I'm not sure that a couple of random blogs should count, but I don't think we need academic journals to review Horizon. 15. For objectives 3 and 4, are the time limits relative to the release date for Adelie 1.0, or are they relative to some other milestone? 16. For Charlie's 4th need, does he need full-disk encryption, or is encrypting all of the Adelie partitions except /boot sufficient? 17. How long has Dakota been using Linux? An enthusiast could just be someone who installed a popular distro for the first time last month or someone who has used it since grade school, which represents a large range of experience. 18. Would Dakota also want to select different storage schemes (LVM, btrfs subvolumes, RAID, etc) and filesystems? 19. The "(See NEX-#.)" references are ambiguous. 20. How esoteric is River's hardware? Are we talking a somewhat uncommon ARM SBC like a BeagleBone Black, or is it something crazier like a toaster powered by UltraSPARC? 21. For risk #1, another possible mitigation might be to involve someone who has user experience design experience. The parties from different communities should have different levels of familiarity with Linux and other Unix-like systems. 22. For risks #2 and #3, another possible mitigation might be to elicit assistance from other developers. Raising community awareness of Adelie's existence and our goals could inspire more people to get involved. 23. For risk #2, it's not really a for-profit project anyway, so maybe this risk should have an end result of something besides severe financial losses. 24. I can think of some additional risks for not having Horizon. Users having technical problems due to bad installations would give Adelie a poor reputation and take up a lot of time for community support (an issue I saw a lot when I was involved with #archlinux). Potential developers and maintainers would not contribute because the barrier to getting started with Adelie is too high. 25. "Existing Systems" should include more citations. 26. Under Charlie's needs, I would change "creating a new partition" to "creating new partitions" and change "the Windows 10 OS" to just "Windows 10". 27. Would it make sense to combine all the chapters into a single HTML document? People (including me the first couple of times I read this) might not see the Prev/Next links and assume Chapter 1 is the whole thing. Chapters 2 and 3 are pretty short too. 28. Under Vision, Assumptions Made, users who are installing to an SBC might not have a display output. In this case, should we support using a serial console or some other way to interact with Horizon? I think some SBC distributions just ship ready-to-use image that can be dd'd to an SD card. 29. For DEP-5: Boot loaders, do we want to include other bootloaders? syslinux doesn't work very well with x86 UEFI, and I don't think it works at all without x86. 30. For DEP-6, I suggest we specify TLS 1.2 for HTTPS and change CIFS to CIFS/SMB. By SFTP, do you mean FTP with TLS or do you mean the sftp subsystem of SSH? 31. For DEP-3, chapter 1 mentions wireless networks. Should DEP-3 include wireless network status and authentication? If it does, then it should also include a way to discover available networks or enter information for hidden networks. 32. For DEP-2, should we include a list of supported filesystems and other storage schemes (LVM, dm-crypt, RAID, etc.)? Other that those things, I think this looks really good so far! -Lee, ComArb/QA