Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
  b=jWj+fozFjPH0DiAJjp4q9Bbryur4Z5hSTnLJ7/3PcOek80hNdifvFJT3nMqH4a/J;
  h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Message-ID: <4398D1FD.4040607@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 19:38:21 -0500
From: Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Does there need to be a default web container?
References: <4398C232.9020702@apache.org> <4398C430.7010303@gmail.com>
 <74e15baa0512081554saa24be3g499dc05e685a2914@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <74e15baa0512081554saa24be3g499dc05e685a2914@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Aaron Mulder wrote:
> I hate to say it, but from a usability perspective, I think we need to
> have a default.  Otherwise, when installing Geronimo, the first thing
> the user has to do is make a decision that most users really have no
> basis for making.  Granted a Wiki link would help, but I think we need
> to provide a "0-decision" install path where you can essentially just
> click through and something good will happen.
> 
> At the end of the day, I wish we could avoid the politics, and I
> definitely don't think we need to present this as an official
> "Geronimo preference".  Any documentation referenced can start out by
> saying "either one will work fine and we fully support both" (and the
> TAR/ZIP download page should say the same).  Still, I would really
> prefer to have a pre-selected default on the install screen when it
> comes up.
> 
> Thanks,
>     Aaron 

I agree with Aaron with regard to usability.   Users don't want to have 
to make any decisions on the first install (especially when they first 
pick it up for evaluation).  My mom doesn't install anything on her 
computer unless she can click, click, click and get it working.  I know 
our users are more sophisticated than her  ... but we want to make it as 
easy as possibly to get something working quickly.  We want to make this 
easy enough for my mom to install (even though she never will).  :-)

Joe


> On 12/8/05, John Sisson <jrsisson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>+1 - I don't think we should make the decision for the user.
>>
>>It would be even better if the installer in a "Choose Your Web
>>Container" page, provided a URL or link to a page on the Wiki that
>>provided information that would help them make an informed decision.
>>
>>See related ideas in http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1314
>>
>>John
>>
>>Jeff Genender wrote:
>>
>>
>>>This is obviously a hot topic and I hope that as a Geronimo PMC and
>>>user community we are not forced to have to show preference of one
>>>over the other.  There is obviously some personal preferences on both
>>>sides and we are a great open source project because we do not have to
>>>get behind one *or* the other.  We can get behind them both.
>>>
>>>May I ask why the installer/wizard cannot have a page called "Choose
>>>Your Web Container" and have an option for Jetty and Tomcat, but
>>>neither selected?  Does there need to be a default?  Can we just let
>>>the end user choose?
>>>
>>>IMHO, I don't think we should provide a preference for one over the
>>>other.  I really like both.  I think we should give the user the
>>>choice without hinting a preference.
>>>
>>>Thoughts and comments?
>>>
>>>Jeff
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn@earthlink.net

"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot 
lose."   -- Jim Elliot