Warning on unreleased versions.

Hi,

Post by John Darrington
"This version is intended for testing purposes only. Please report any problems."
What do you think?

I think it is a good idea. Maybe even:

"This development version..." or even "This pre-released version..."

Regards,

Matej

- --
PGP Fingerprint: 3B74 637D 8409 53F9 A704 F27C BEA5 286D A9CF 4A88
PGP Key:
https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEA5286DA9CF4A88

news

2016-02-26 22:33:14 UTC

I would be ok with this warning. I think there should be one.

- ftr

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,

Post by John Darrington
"This version is intended for testing purposes only. Please report any problems."
What do you think?

"This development version..." or even "This pre-released version..."
Regards,
Matej
- --
PGP Fingerprint: 3B74 637D 8409 53F9 A704 F27C BEA5 286D A9CF 4A88
https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEA5286DA9CF4A88
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1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=r3Dc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

Alan Mead

2016-02-26 19:47:31 UTC

Post by John Darrington
Let's see if we can come to a compromise here.
Alan takes the view that users should not be discouraged to try the latest git snapshots,
whereas the decision to add this notice to those snapshots was taken in order to ensure
that users are fully aware of what they are getting. I don't think that these two goals
need to be mutually exclusive.
"This version is intended for testing purposes only. Please report any problems."

John,

I appreciate your willingness to listen to input.

I personally prefer not to tell people what to do:

"Testing version may contain bugs; please report any problems."

or even:

"This testing version probably contains some bugs; please report any
problems."

There was also the point that the title bars may not be the best place
for this message. Could we agree that this warning should be displayed
elsewhere if/when a better medium becomes available? Would it be hard
to print something at the top of each output window each time the
software ran?

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-02-26 19:48:57 UTC

Everybody slept already for one or two nights?

Ben Pfaff

2016-02-27 22:48:54 UTC

Post by John Darrington
Alan takes the view that users should not be discouraged to try the latest git snapshots,
whereas the decision to add this notice to those snapshots was taken in order to ensure
that users are fully aware of what they are getting. I don't think that these two goals
need to be mutually exclusive.
"This version is intended for testing purposes only. Please report any problems."
I think that will make it clear that problems *might* occur, without frightening or
intimidating the user.

I've been following this discussion but I've refrained from commenting
until now.

I don't like to tell users not to use a given version of PSPP because
it's just for testing, and I appreciate that our packagers package not
just releases but also development versions. After all, if users do not
have a way to run development versions, then they will not get tested
and thus will not serve their purpose for testing!

On the other hand, I think users should be informed that a given version
of PSPP is likely to have more bugs than one would ordinarily expect
from a PSPP release. I think we can make that clear, however, without
the shrillness and placement of the current warning.

I think that an appropriately worded notice can make all of this clear.
For example:

This is a development version of PSPP. Please be alert to the
likely possibility that it contain more bugs than a PSPP release.
If you encounter bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP
developers at bug-gnu-***@gnu.org, to enable them to be fixed.

John Darrington

2016-02-28 06:44:33 UTC

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 02:48:54PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:

I think that an appropriately worded notice can make all of this clear.
For example:

This is a development version of PSPP. Please be alert to the
likely possibility that it contain more bugs than a PSPP release.
If you encounter bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP
developers at bug-gnu-***@gnu.org, to enable them to be fixed.

That would be ideal. However it won't fit on the title bar.

A number of people have suggested other possibilities:

1. In the output window after each operation.

I don't think that is a good idea for several reasons: a) It would
break all of our regression tests; b) The user would not see it
until late - possibly until after he encounters a bug - if that bug
causes a crash or a hang - then he won't see it at all.

2. On a translucent overlay permanently superimposed on the window.

Effective, but perhaps too annoying.

3. On a second splash screen which needs to be acknowledged by the user

This would probably work, but would mean extra coding - not only does
that mean work for us, but it also means that what gets tested is not
what gets delivered in a release. I like to test what we deliver, and
deliver what we test.

J'

Ben Pfaff

2016-02-28 18:00:41 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
I think that an appropriately worded notice can make all of this clear.
This is a development version of PSPP. Please be alert to the
likely possibility that it contain more bugs than a PSPP release.
If you encounter bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP
That would be ideal. However it won't fit on the title bar.
1. In the output window after each operation.
I don't think that is a good idea for several reasons: a) It would
break all of our regression tests; b) The user would not see it
until late - possibly until after he encounters a bug - if that bug
causes a crash or a hang - then he won't see it at all.

I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.

For example:

diff --git a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
index 469966a..1da4b24 100644
--- a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
+++ b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
@@ -182,6 +182,15 @@ psppire_output_window_setup (void)
output_driver_init (d, &psppire_output_class, "PSPPIRE",
SETTINGS_DEVICE_UNFILTERED);
output_driver_register (d);
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "developers at bug-gnu-***@gnu.org, to enable them "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}

Alan Mead

2016-02-29 13:41:10 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}

This seems good to me but is there a way around John's objections that
regression tests would fail? Or is that not a big deal?

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Ben Pfaff

2016-02-29 15:49:37 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}

This seems good to me but is there a way around John's objections that
regression tests would fail? Or is that not a big deal?

I guess I must have missed that or misunderstood it. What is the
problem with regression tests?

John Darrington

2016-02-29 17:34:15 UTC

Doing it the way Ben suggests would not break the regression tests.

Post by Ben Pfaff
I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}

This seems good to me but is there a way around John's objections that
regression tests would fail? Or is that not a big deal?

John Darrington

2016-03-01 05:37:49 UTC

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 10:00:41AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:

I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.

For example:

diff --git a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
index 469966a..1da4b24 100644
--- a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
+++ b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
@@ -182,6 +182,15 @@ psppire_output_window_setup (void)
output_driver_init (d, &psppire_output_class, "PSPPIRE",
SETTINGS_DEVICE_UNFILTERED);
output_driver_register (d);
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "developers at bug-gnu-***@gnu.org, to enable them "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}

The wording seems find to me.

I'm not so sure that is will be as noticable as we would like - it will scroll
off the top of the screen after a large output. And in cases like reported here:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/pspp-users/2016-02/msg00007.html

The user would not have seen the message until after experiencing the bug, if at all.

How about we implement Ben's suggestion AND have an abridged version of his words
on the title-bar?

The abridged version could read: "This is a development version. It may contain bugs."

Alan Mead

2016-03-01 07:33:12 UTC

Post by John Darrington
The wording seems find to me.
I'm not so sure that is will be as noticable as we would like - it will scroll
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/pspp-users/2016-02/msg00007.html
The user would not have seen the message until after experiencing the bug, if at all.
How about we implement Ben's suggestion AND have an abridged version of his words
on the title-bar?
The abridged version could read: "This is a development version. It may contain bugs."

John,

I'm not sure I understand what you're referring to with the link about
ftr's confusion about the message and the snapshots? But I'm not opposed
to including a non-scary message in the header.

-Alan

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-01 07:44:02 UTC

Post by John Darrington
How about we implement Ben's suggestion AND have an abridged version of his words
on the title-bar?
The abridged version could read: "This is a development version. It may contain bugs."

John,
I'm not sure I understand what you're referring to with the link about ftr's confusion about the message and the snapshots? But I'm not opposed to including a non-scary message in the header.
-Alan

What about having just

Post by John Darrington
"This is a development version. It may contain bugs.â

in the title bar? Would you consider this non-scary?

Friedrich

Alan Mead

2016-03-01 07:47:22 UTC

"This is a development version. It may contain bugs.“

in the title bar? Would you consider this non-scary?
What about having just
Friedrich

Kailash Gajara

2016-03-01 07:56:40 UTC

How do I make this mailman list send me only digest email and not all emails please?

Kailash

"This is a development version. It may contain bugs.“

in the title bar? Would you consider this non-scary?
What about having just
Friedrich

No, it doesn't seem scary to me; but I hope we continue to be open to feedback from users. If a snapshot has a bug fix but such a message puts off the user from installing it, I may change my opinion.
(But I doubt it, it doesn't seem very scary.)
-Alan
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

Alan Mead

2016-03-01 08:01:50 UTC

Post by Kailash Gajara
How do I make this mailman list send me only digest email and not all emails please?
Kailash

Go here:

https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

and find near the bottom where it says "To unsubscribe from Pspp-users,
get a password reminder, or change your subscription options enter your
subscription email address:" and enter your email, then your password
(on the next screen I think) and then you can change options.

You could also unsubscribe and then subscribe again because you can pick
this option when you subscribe.

-Alan

Mark Hancock

2016-03-01 22:35:57 UTC

I agree that this sounds less scary (and even just making it not ALL CAPS
would go a long way).

However, I maintain that the title bar is not the right way to warn people
in an interface. Title bars are for application names and information like
filenames.

Currently, the titlebar looks as follows (for data sets):

<filename> [DataSetX] --- PSPPIRE Data Editor - REALLY LONG MESSAGE IN ALL
CAPS

There is precedent for status information appearing here (e.g.,
[Compatibility Mode] in Microsoft Word), and so I would recommend instead
of trying to craft a message, instead indicate that information as a status.

For example:

<filename> [DataSetX] --- PSPPIRE Data Editor (Development Version)

You could alternatively put "(Unstable)", which I personally prefer, as it
indicates a status of the software, highlights that the software may not
work ("bug" is actually jargon used by developers, not language that should
be expected to be understood, as is "development" and "version"), and is
conveniently much shorter.

Also keep in mind that in the current version (and probably in the
recommended message by others so far), the message may not be entirely
visible, depending on the size of the window. This is because title bars
were not intended for communicating warning messages (have I mentioned
that, yet?).

Mark

Post by John Darrington
"This is a development version. It may contain bugs.â
in the title bar? Would you consider this non-scary?
What about having just
Friedrich

No, it doesn't seem scary to me; but I hope we continue to be open to
feedback from users. If a snapshot has a bug fix but such a message puts
off the user from installing it, I may change my opinion.
(But I doubt it, it doesn't seem very scary.)
-Alan
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

John Darrington

2016-03-02 05:13:47 UTC

On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:35:57PM -0500, Mark Hancock wrote:

However, I maintain that the title bar is not the right way to warn people
in an interface. Title bars are for application names and information like
filenames.

You may well have a point here. But I would reieterate that this message ONLY
displayed for development versions and NEVER for those intended for users.
For the same reason your claim that only developers understand the word "bug" is
moot.

So does it really matter?

J'

John Darrington

2016-03-02 05:17:45 UTC

"This is a development version. It may contain bugs.???

in the title bar? Would you consider this non-scary?
What about having just
Friedrich

No, it doesn't seem scary to me; but I hope we continue to be
open to feedback from users.

We will always welcome user feedback. We will also try to remain
completely honest with our users and ensure that they know the
nature of the software they are using.

J'

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-02 07:38:13 UTC

Hi all,

I have the impression that we are now at a point where any solution will piss off some people, while at the same time the consequences of any solution will at maximum be minor for all users (can I do more or less with psppire, with any of the solutions?). So maybe we should let the dice decide. We could use the following random number generation site:

https://www.lotto.de/de/ergebnisse/lotto-6aus49/archiv.html <https://www.lotto.de/de/ergebnisse/lotto-6aus49/archiv.html>

If the first number on saturday, march 5th is:

1-15 no message at all
16-32 "This is a development version. It may contain bugs.â in the title bar
33-49 "This is a development version. It may contain bugs.â in the output window.

This will piss off nobody and at the same time you can at maximum have the feeling that you are not a lucky man.

What do you think?

Friedrich

Matej Kovacic

2016-03-02 09:48:02 UTC

Hi,

Post by John Darrington
What do you think?

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-02 10:28:20 UTC

Hey Matej,

Post by Matej Kovacic
Yes, but is it a really true random number generator behind? What kind
of algorithms are used? Or is it used hardware based RNG? If so, which
provider?

you may convince yourself...:

and we could watch it via livestream next saturday at 19:25 german time.
In addtion everbody could buy a lot and become rich! For those who figure out
a specific bias in the numbers I definitly recommend a lot.

Post by Matej Kovacic
I may be pissed off with a given solution, but PSPP is a great piece
of software

Thats what I want to hear!

Friedrich

Fábián Zoltán

2016-03-02 19:14:10 UTC

+1. I agree with every each point of Matej.

(I have no such eloquence as Winston Churchill had.)

Cheers,

Zoltán

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,

Post by John Darrington
What do you think?

Yes, but is it a really true random number generator behind? What kind
of algorithms are used? Or is it used hardware based RNG? If so, which
provider?
:-)
I mean this is not a decision for a dice. It is a decision the project
manager shoud do. There should be no democracy here. Also, developers
do not ask users to vote or approve every single change of code.
I may be pissed off with a given solution, but PSPP is a great piece
of software and existence or non-existence of this text is really not
so important.
My opinion is - it is OK that we give proposals. But final decision
should be done by developers and users should accept that and trust
them. Unless we will have anarchy.
Regards,
M.
- --
PGP Fingerprint: 3B74 637D 8409 53F9 A704 F27C BEA5 286D A9CF 4A88
https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEA5286DA9CF4A88
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1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=u4Qw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

Alan Mead

2016-03-03 00:24:05 UTC

Post by Matej Kovacic
I mean this is not a decision for a dice. It is a decision the project
manager shoud do. There should be no democracy here.

Sorry to be late in responding, I didn't see Friedrich's OP (about using
dice to settle the concern about the labeling of untested snapshots).

I agree with Matej. I'm happy that (a) there will be a new PSPP release
soon and (b) there has been a productive discussion about how to label
unreleased snapshots. Regardless of the outcome, I'm excited as PSPP
continues to get better.

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time
for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Ben Pfaff

2016-03-01 23:46:52 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.
diff --git a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
index 469966a..1da4b24 100644
--- a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
+++ b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
@@ -182,6 +182,15 @@ psppire_output_window_setup (void)
output_driver_init (d, &psppire_output_class, "PSPPIRE",
SETTINGS_DEVICE_UNFILTERED);
output_driver_register (d);
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}
The wording seems find to me.
I'm not so sure that is will be as noticable as we would like - it
will scroll off the top of the screen after a large output.

Why can't the user see it at startup? I don't understand why it needs
to be visible at all times.

Post by Ben Pfaff
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/pspp-users/2016-02/msg00007.html
The user would not have seen the message until after experiencing the bug, if at all.

The user will see the message as soon as he (or she) starts PSPP. You
are saying that the user in that case experienced a bug before PSPP
started? I don't understand.

John Darrington

2016-03-02 05:09:16 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.
diff --git a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
index 469966a..1da4b24 100644
--- a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
+++ b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
@@ -182,6 +182,15 @@ psppire_output_window_setup (void)
output_driver_init (d, &psppire_output_class, "PSPPIRE",
SETTINGS_DEVICE_UNFILTERED);
output_driver_register (d);
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}
The wording seems find to me.
I'm not so sure that is will be as noticable as we would like - it
will scroll off the top of the screen after a large output.

Why can't the user see it at startup?

The output window is (at least on the window manager I use) below the data window, unless
explicitly raised. Typically, a user will only raise that window, when she explicity
has interest in what she thinks is there. The users who stand to benefit from this
message, are those who are unaware of its content. Such users will typically start psppire,
run a procedure and THEN look in the output window. Typically the user does not look in
the output window the moment it starts up.

Post by Ben Pfaff
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/pspp-users/2016-02/msg00007.html
The user would not have seen the message until after experiencing the bug, if at all.

The user will see the message as soon as he (or she) starts PSPP. You
are saying that the user in that case experienced a bug before PSPP
started? I don't understand.

No. For reasons mentioned above he will (probably) not see the message. He will :
Start Psppire; Load the large file (at this point he has not looked in the output
window - he has no reason to) ; Run a procedure (whereupon, due to the bug, it
enters a very long loop - appears to hang).

J'

Ben Pfaff

2016-03-02 18:44:04 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
I suggest putting it into the output window at startup, once. This is
easy to do, it is likely that users will notice, and it is not as
obnoxious as some of the other options.
diff --git a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
index 469966a..1da4b24 100644
--- a/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
+++ b/src/ui/gui/psppire-output-window.c
@@ -182,6 +182,15 @@ psppire_output_window_setup (void)
output_driver_init (d, &psppire_output_class, "PSPPIRE",
SETTINGS_DEVICE_UNFILTERED);
output_driver_register (d);
+
+ text_item_submit (
+ text_item_create (TEXT_ITEM_PARAGRAPH,
+ _("This is a development version of PSPP. Please be "
+ "alert to the likely possibility that it contains "
+ "more bugs than a PSPP release. If you encounter "
+ "bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP "
+ "to be fixed.")));
}
The wording seems find to me.
I'm not so sure that is will be as noticable as we would like - it
will scroll off the top of the screen after a large output.

Why can't the user see it at startup?
The output window is (at least on the window manager I use) below the data window, unless
explicitly raised. Typically, a user will only raise that window, when she explicity
has interest in what she thinks is there. The users who stand to benefit from this
message, are those who are unaware of its content. Such users will typically start psppire,
run a procedure and THEN look in the output window. Typically the user does not look in
the output window the moment it starts up.

Perhaps PSPPIRE should raise the output window, then.

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-02 18:52:34 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
Why can't the user see it at startup?
The output window is (at least on the window manager I use) below the data window, unless
explicitly raised. Typically, a user will only raise that window, when she explicity
has interest in what she thinks is there. The users who stand to benefit from this
message, are those who are unaware of its content. Such users will typically start psppire,
run a procedure and THEN look in the output window. Typically the user does not look in
the output window the moment it starts up.

Perhaps PSPPIRE should raise the output window, then.

That would then be the first really negative functional impact of this warning that John planned.
There are good reasons why the windows are raised as they are today.

Friedrich

Ben Pfaff

2016-03-02 19:00:41 UTC

Perhaps PSPPIRE should raise the output window, then.

That would then be the first really negative functional impact of this warning that John planned.
There are good reasons why the windows are raised as they are today.

What are these reasons?

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-02 19:24:29 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
Perhaps PSPPIRE should raise the output window, then.

That would then be the first really negative functional impact of this warning that John planned.
There are good reasons why the windows are raised as they are today.

What are these reasons?

For example:

a) You call psppire with a .sav file: The main data window is shown
b) You call psppire with a .sps file: The Syntax editor is shown
c) You call psppire with no parameters: The main data view window is shown

Assume you then want to create a new syntax file:
The output window does not allow you to do that. You have to switch to the main
window and do File->New->Syntax file

Assume you want to type in some data: Just click and type.

Switching from the output window is a completely useless step. The only
reason to see the output window is to see output from a previous analysis.
I cannot think of a usecase where the output window
should be raised except you do an analysis (as it is today).

Modifying the functional behavior of psppire just to show the warning will definitly change
user experience between development and non-development versions. I think this is not good.

Maybe we just leave it as is with maybe changing the title text to one of the versions cited
in one of the previous messages in this thread?

Friedrich

John Darrington

2016-03-02 19:26:01 UTC

Perhaps PSPPIRE should raise the output window, then.

That would then be the first really negative functional impact of this warning that John planned.
There are good reasons why the windows are raised as they are today.

Here's a solution which I think will satisfy everyone:

1 Release 0.10.0 is imminent. Let's release it asap. As it will be an official release, it will not have any warning.

2 Then, as a first post-release task, let's replace the existing splash screen with an startup window
which must be acknowledged. Then we don't need to have any warning in the titlebar, or in the output window.

J'

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-02 19:35:44 UTC

Post by John Darrington
2 Then, as a first post-release task, let's replace the existing splash screen with an startup window
which must be acknowledged. Then we don't need to have any warning in the titlebar, or in the output window.

Please, do not let us sacrifice functionality for this purpose. Nobody wants to acknowledge this. Nobody. Yes, nobody.
Please remember software that does want you to acknowledge something like this. You hate it. For good reason.

Please remember the reason for the splash screen as we discussed it already: Inform the user that something
has happened when he started the software, if the startup time is long. Thats it. The logo is perfect and the warning
message does not harm this purpose.

Friedrich

Mark Hancock

2016-03-02 20:00:44 UTC

I've attached a screenshot of what I think is a much better solution (to
change the website). I think this simple change would alleviate the need
for any messages in the application (though still wouldn't object to
"(unstable)" or "(development)" in the title bar, just not a long
instructional message).

[image: Inline image 1]

This can be done by adding the following HTML:

<ul style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<li>The latest stable release is: 0.8.5
(<strong>recommended</strong>)</li>
<li>The latest development release is: 0.9.0</li>
</ul>

You could obviously make these numbers be dynamically loaded from
somewhere, if that makes updating less cumbersome.

This suggestion is assuming you have no control over the
http://pspp.awardspace.com/ page. If you do, it would be much better to
redesign it so that it has a salient link to the most stable recent
release, and a harder-to-find-and-accidentally-download link to the dev
version.

Mark

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Friedrich Beckmann <

Post by John Darrington

Am 02.03.2016 um 20:26 schrieb John Darrington <
2 Then, as a first post-release task, let's replace the existing splash

screen with an startup window

which must be acknowledged. Then we don't need to have any warning in

the titlebar, or in the output window.
Please, do not let us sacrifice functionality for this purpose. Nobody
wants to acknowledge this. Nobody. Yes, nobody.
Please remember software that does want you to acknowledge something like
this. You hate it. For good reason.
Please remember the reason for the splash screen as we discussed it
already: Inform the user that something
has happened when he started the software, if the startup time is long.
Thats it. The logo is perfect and the warning
message does not harm this purpose.
Friedrich
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

Alan Mead

2016-03-02 22:34:03 UTC

Mark,

Maybe you understand this very well, but I think a better way to think
about this is that the PSPP team releases a release of PSPP (which is
source code) and then platform-specific "packagers" release binaries for
their platform, possibly making decisions along the way. For example,
Friedrich is the packager for Debian and he might make changes if PSPP
fails Debian tests. A packager might possibly be very active, porting
bug fixes and releasing new packages. Maybe this is bad behavior, but
packagers have sometimes made choices that were even upsetting to the
"upstream" project (I'm thinking about Red Hat's controversial decisions
about gcc) because the packages are primarily concerned with their platform.

By this logic, there is no "official" binary release of PSPP for any
platform, including therefore that there will never be an official
Windows release of PSPP.

I see the logic of "recommending" 0.8.5 but I'm not sure I agree. I
believe that all of the 2015 snapshots available for Windows on
pspp.awardspace.com have an extremely serious bug triggered by having a
non-ASCII character in Windows paths. So, many non-English speakers
will hit this bug which will be a show-stopper for them. Isn't it
better to recommend to them that they use the latest 0.9.0-g745ee3
snapshot? I think Harry's practice of supplying a latest snapshot
package and also some older packages is an extremely practical approach.
I also think it's a decision that properly belongs to the packager.

Finally, the opposing view is that 0.9.0-g745ee3 contains all kinds of
other changes, including really big changes like a switch to GTK+ 3 (I
think?). I think the remedy for this would be to have a process for
testing Windows packages so that they don't have to have "untested"
labeling.

-Alan

Post by Mark Hancock
I've attached a screenshot of what I think is a much better solution
(to change the website). I think this simple change would alleviate
the need for any messages in the application (though still wouldn't
object to "(unstable)" or "(development)" in the title bar, just not a
long instructional message).
Inline image 1
<ul style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<li>The latest stable release is: 0.8.5
(<strong>recommended</strong>)</li>
<li>The latest development release is: 0.9.0</li>
</ul>
You could obviously make these numbers be dynamically loaded from
somewhere, if that makes updating less cumbersome.
This suggestion is assuming you have no control over
the http://pspp.awardspace.com/ page. If you do, it would be much
better to redesign it so that it has a salient link to the most stable
recent release, and a harder-to-find-and-accidentally-download link to
the dev version.
Mark
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Friedrich Beckmann

Am 02.03.2016 um 20:26 schrieb John Darrington
2 Then, as a first post-release task, let's replace the existing splash screen with an startup window
which must be acknowledged. Then we don't need to have any

warning in the titlebar, or in the output window.
Please, do not let us sacrifice functionality for this purpose.
Nobody wants to acknowledge this. Nobody. Yes, nobody.
Please remember software that does want you to acknowledge
something like this. You hate it. For good reason.
Please remember the reason for the splash screen as we discussed
it already: Inform the user that something
has happened when he started the software, if the startup time is
long. Thats it. The logo is perfect and the warning
message does not harm this purpose.
Friedrich
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Alan Mead

2016-03-02 21:42:08 UTC

In SPSS there is such a screen, but it also had a checkbox that makes it
go away permanently. The splash screen could be similar. You could make
the user acknowledge it once.

One good reason _beyond this warning_ for doing so is that the current
splash screen is not truly visible when I run PSPP on a fast machine.
Friedrich explains that this was the desired behavior, but frankly on a
fast machine it's weird to have a dialog whiz past without enough time
to read it.

One good reason NOT to have a PSPPIRE splash screen (i.e. not to follow
SPSS) is that the SPSS screen also has added functionality like allowing
the user to re-open recently used syntax and data files. So, having a
modal dialog without useful functionality adds no functionality.

Post by John Darrington
Please, do not let us sacrifice functionality for this purpose. Nobody wants to acknowledge this. Nobody. Yes, nobody.
Please remember software that does want you to acknowledge something like this. You hate it. For good reason.

I don't disagree about annoyances but if you only needed to acknowledge
it once, I don't think it would be so bad. I don't use any of the SPSS
"start-up dialog" functionality but I haven't banished it permanently
because it's not a big deal to just hit cancel each time it appears
(which is only when I first start SPSS).

About raising the output window, I notice that using 0.8.5, when I open
a .SAV file from inside PSPPIRE, a warning (e.g., about encoding of the
.SAV file) causes the output window to be raised over the data window.
This isn't so different from the behavior of raising the output window
when this "unreleased version" warning is printed.

But anyway, is this a big deal? I don't think it's a big deal that a
warning about the version is printed to the output window which isn't
raised until the user raises it themself. I also don't think it would
be a big deal if the output window were raised once after this
information was output.

I also don't think it would be a big deal to also put this information
on the splash screen, even if some people cannot read it.

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Ben Pfaff

2016-03-03 00:51:30 UTC

In SPSS there is such a screen, but it also had a checkbox that makes it
go away permanently. The splash screen could be similar. You could make
the user acknowledge it once.

I could support that.

Mark Hancock

2016-03-03 06:43:31 UTC

I do have some understanding of the packager vs. developer situation, yes,
but didn't know there was a known bug in 0.8.5 that is so serious in
Windows, so the explanation is very appreciated.

Just to be clear, I'm not actually advocating recommending 0.8.5
specifically (I thought that's what the devs were advocating), and if it
does have known bugs that are likely show-stoppers, it's probably a good
idea to label it that way. My recommendation is about putting the
information you want to communicate right in-place where the download is
about to happen (and where the devs have control to change it, rather than
the packager).

I know the thought is that there is already a message above this long list
that mentions these are packages not made by the developers, so may not
work, but it seems doubtful that people looking for a binary to download
will take the time to read that before finding the nice link-looking thing
next to the specific word they're looking for ("Windows", in this case).

If 0.10 fixes both problems (i.e., is even-numbered and doesn't have a
show-stopping bug), it seems like it really is the best solution to just
get that out quickly and not waste too much time with this discussion.

I think there's still an issue that hasn't been addressed, though, and
that's that there's no consistent way of communicating the necessary
information when downloading these binaries (and that really is the right
time to communicate this, not after it's already been installed and run for
the first time, and probably not in the title bar, though this could
minimally reinforce the idea).

I know this is a Linux-first community, but PSPP is at its core an
alternative to SPSS, and my guess is that most people familiar with SPSS
are familiar with it in Windows. This is a natural place for people looking
for an alternative to land.

It seems like the minimum necessary information isn't really "development
version", "this may contain bugs", or even "recommended" or "official"
after all. Instead of assuming the people downloading won't be able to
understand, maybe better and more complete descriptions are in order.
Something like:

0.8.5 (stable, but has a known Windows-specific bug)
0.9.0 (development version, with bug fixed, but possibly unstable)

This gives the needed information, so the person downloading can decide
before installing (and the devs can be agnostic about recommendations).
When 0.10.0 rolls out, maybe you should then use fewer words:

0.10.0 (latest stable release)
0.11.0 (possibly unstable development version)

If you use consistent language, the title bar can then just reinforce what
is more likely to have already been noticed (e.g., repeat "(development)"
or "(unstable)" there).

There is an issue with my suggestion, though, in that the placement may
mean people would expect sub-bullets for each OS, which would become
unruly. You do have extra text for Mac already, though, so maybe this
precedent has already been set, and you can just do this in brackets. The
current "installers or all downloadable files" gives no hint about the
situation.

Mark

Post by John Darrington

Am 02.03.2016 um 20:26 schrieb John Darrington <
2 Then, as a first post-release task, let's replace the existing

splash screen with an startup window

which must be acknowledged. Then we don't need to have any warning

in the titlebar, or in the output window.

Post by Alan Mead
In SPSS there is such a screen, but it also had a checkbox that makes it
go away permanently. The splash screen could be similar. You could make
the user acknowledge it once.

I could support that.
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

John Darrington

2016-03-03 17:06:13 UTC

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 01:43:31AM -0500, Mark Hancock wrote:

I know this is a Linux-first community,

I am disappointed that you think this. It is a common misconception which
we have tried hard to dispell.

It is true that PSPP *can* run on the same computer which might also run the
linux kernel, but that does not make it a "linux first" program any more than
it makes it a "Libreoffice first" program.

Linux is mentioned only in passing on the website (not more than any other
system). Likewise, it is only briefly mentioned in the documentation where there
are a few fearures which are specific to GNU/Linux systems.

PSPP is a program which is part of the GNU project.
PSPP's repository, download site, web site and mailing lists are all hosted on
gnu.org GNU's relationship to Linux is made clear at http://gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html

Can you tell me what gave you the impression that PSPP was a "linux first" project?
We need to try to correct that perception.

J'

Mark Hancock

2016-03-03 17:54:39 UTC

It was actually nothing that was said by PSPP devs, but in the GNU
documentation. Specifically, this:
http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Platforms

I actually do get the sense that the devs here care about the Windows
experience, but just don't have the resources to test it. It's also been
noted that all the devs use some Linux-based OS exclusively, and because
open source projects naturally are motivated by personal priorities, there
is an underlying tendency to notice and fix things in Linux first.

I don't actually have a problem with things being Linux-first, by the way,
and I think most of the good open source things out there often are Linux
first, and then evolve into more mainstream things (e.g., GIMP,
OpenOffice). I personally think for PSPP in its current stage, being
Linux-first is *good*, as long as the Windows option is kept around and
paid attention to (as it obviously is).

My comment before was just in the context of the fact that the discussion
around how to fix the messaging was primarily around a Windows-specific
situation, which maybe didn't apply to PSPP on other platforms. I do think
it's better to focus energy on improving PSPP for all platforms and not
spend too much time on just this one issue.

By the way, I'm not yet a frequent user of PSPP myself, as I'm "waiting in
the wings" for it to have enough of the features from SPSS that I need to
be able to switch over (specifically, I do a lot of repeated measures
studies, or mixed designs with between and within subjects factors, and the
GLM in PSPP doesn't yet support that). I really am looking forward to the
day that I can switch, though. I really hate the SPSS pricing model.

Mark

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:06 PM, John Darrington <

Post by Mark Hancock
I know this is a Linux-first community,
I am disappointed that you think this. It is a common misconception which
we have tried hard to dispell.
It is true that PSPP *can* run on the same computer which might also run the
linux kernel, but that does not make it a "linux first" program any more than
it makes it a "Libreoffice first" program.
Linux is mentioned only in passing on the website (not more than any other
system). Likewise, it is only briefly mentioned in the documentation where there
are a few fearures which are specific to GNU/Linux systems.
PSPP is a program which is part of the GNU project.
PSPP's repository, download site, web site and mailing lists are all hosted on
gnu.org GNU's relationship to Linux is made clear at
http://gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html
Can you tell me what gave you the impression that PSPP was a "linux first" project?
We need to try to correct that perception.
J'
--
Avoid eavesdropping. Send strong encryted email.
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3
fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285 A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

Ben Pfaff

2016-03-03 18:20:54 UTC

Post by Mark Hancock
It was actually nothing that was said by PSPP devs, but in the GNU
http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Platforms

John may be drawing your attention to the difference between Linux (a
kernel) and GNU/Linux (a complete operating system). The focus of GNU
development is not for GNU on a particular kernel (such as Linux) but on
the complete operating system or, more broadly speaking, development of
free software that runs well in conjunction with other free software.
So emphasizing that PSPP is designed to run well on top of a particular
kernel, Linux, is a somewhat myopic point of view.

However, I doubt that you actually meant to emphasize the kernel when
you said Linux; probably, you really meant the entire GNU/Linux
operating system.

Alan Mead

2016-03-03 18:32:20 UTC

Post by Mark Hancock
I actually do get the sense that the devs here care about the Windows
experience, but just don't have the resources to test it. It's also
been noted that all the devs use some Linux-based OS exclusively, and
because open source projects naturally are motivated by personal
priorities, there is an underlying tendency to notice and fix things
in Linux first.

I agree (both with this comment and Mark's perception that PSPP could be
seen as "GNU/Linux first").

I agree also that the remedy is more involvement from Windows users and
programmers.

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Frans Houweling

2016-03-03 20:24:21 UTC

If PSPP could expose a public API then developers on any platform would
be encouraged to build little or big applications on top of it.
Imitating SPSS to the point of copying its cathedral model seems like
excessive zeal to me. It also exposes the developer team to this type of
discussions and recriminations.
As a (daytime) Windows user I apologize for our presumption, our lack of
participation and (to Friedrich) our lack of sense of humour.
frans

Post by Alan Mead
I agree (both with this comment and Mark's perception that PSPP could
be seen as "GNU/Linux first"). I agree also that the remedy is more
involvement from Windows users and programmers. -Alan

Alan Mead

2016-03-03 20:48:15 UTC

My experience has been that the PSPP team is welcoming, so I don't think
"cathedral model" is fair. But I also don't think you need to be
apologetic about being a Windows user or a user. PSPP needs users and
Windows users to test and report bugs.

-Alan

Post by Frans Houweling
If PSPP could expose a public API then developers on any platform
would be encouraged to build little or big applications on top of it.
Imitating SPSS to the point of copying its cathedral model seems like
excessive zeal to me. It also exposes the developer team to this type
of discussions and recriminations.
As a (daytime) Windows user I apologize for our presumption, our lack
of participation and (to Friedrich) our lack of sense of humour.
frans

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-04 10:48:14 UTC

Hi Frans,

As a (daytime) Windows user I apologize for (âŠ) (to Friedrich) our lack of sense of humour.

Never mind. As a full time human being I apologize to us for our wars, injustice, abuse and hunger.

If we could meet in a non-virtual place, we could stand in a ring
and kick our asses all at the same time!

In addition I prepared a supporting poll for the discussion here:

http://doodle.com/poll/xmhq4q4u4sybsvyc <http://doodle.com/poll/xmhq4q4u4sybsvyc>

Everbody welcome!

Friedrich

John Darrington

2016-03-04 15:49:00 UTC

I agree (both with this comment and Mark's perception that PSPP could be
seen as "GNU/Linux first").

Well it certainly is true that fixing issues in GNU/Linux has a higher
priority than fixing Windows issues. But that does not make PSPP a linux
first project. If there is a "pecking order" it is something like this:

1: GNU
2: Other Free OSes (including GNU/Linux)
3: All other OSes (including Windows and some linux based ones)

This, as Mark kindly posted, is the policy of GNU. PSPP is part of GNU.

J'

Ben Pfaff

2016-03-04 16:09:00 UTC

I agree (both with this comment and Mark's perception that PSPP could be
seen as "GNU/Linux first").
Well it certainly is true that fixing issues in GNU/Linux has a higher
priority than fixing Windows issues. But that does not make PSPP a linux
1: GNU
2: Other Free OSes (including GNU/Linux)
3: All other OSes (including Windows and some linux based ones)
This, as Mark kindly posted, is the policy of GNU. PSPP is part of GNU.

This is somewhat theoretical, though. I do not know any PSPP users or
developers who run GNU on Hurd.

John Darrington

2016-03-04 17:38:55 UTC

On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 08:09:00AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:

This is somewhat theoretical, though. I do not know any PSPP users or
developers who run GNU on Hurd.

Habitually, I don't. But I do test it from time-to-time to make sure that it works ok.

J'

Ben Pfaff

2016-03-04 17:43:49 UTC

Post by Ben Pfaff
This is somewhat theoretical, though. I do not know any PSPP users or
developers who run GNU on Hurd.
Habitually, I don't. But I do test it from time-to-time to make sure that it works ok.

Thanks for doing that.

Alan Mead

2016-03-04 17:45:39 UTC

Post by John Darrington
Well it certainly is true that fixing issues in GNU/Linux has a higher
priority than fixing Windows issues. But that does not make PSPP a linux
1: GNU
2: Other Free OSes (including GNU/Linux)
3: All other OSes (including Windows and some linux based ones)
This, as Mark kindly posted, is the policy of GNU. PSPP is part of GNU.

John,

You don't think explicit posts rank ordering Windows below "GNU/Linux"
might give some users the impression that PSPP was a "GNU/Linux first
project"?

But I think your actions actually suggest that PSPP is primarily a "PSPP
first" project -- that you and the other devs do your best to make PSPP
better and I've observed the team fixing Windows bugs. So, that's what
makes me think that there isn't really a "Linux first" attitude or not
one that worries me.

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

John Darrington

2016-03-06 06:12:28 UTC

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 12:54:39PM -0500, Mark Hancock wrote:

By the way, I'm not yet a frequent user of PSPP myself, as I'm "waiting in
the wings" for it to have enough of the features from SPSS that I need to
be able to switch over (specifically, I do a lot of repeated measures
studies, or mixed designs with between and within subjects factors, and the
GLM in PSPP doesn't yet support that).

A more fully featured GLM would certainly be a good thing to have. If you're
able to help with the implementation or testing of it, please discuss it
on the developers mailing list.

J'

Alan Mead

2016-02-29 15:57:53 UTC

Post by John Darrington
1. In the output window after each operation.
I don't think that is a good idea for several reasons: a) It would
break all of our regression tests;

Ben,

I was referring to this. I assumed that John meant that all the
regression tests would have to be updated to expect this language and
that they would then break again if this language was removed for a
production version.

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Ben Pfaff

2016-02-29 16:01:43 UTC

Post by John Darrington
1. In the output window after each operation.
I don't think that is a good idea for several reasons: a) It would
break all of our regression tests;

I was referring to this. I assumed that John meant that all the
regression tests would have to be updated to expect this language and
that they would then break again if this language was removed for a
production version.

I don't see why the regression tests would break. For one thing, we
don't have regression tests for the GUI, which seems to be mostly what
we're talking about. Second, it would not be hard to disable this
message for the regression tests (e.g. with --testing-mode) or filter it
out for the tests.

Alan Mead

2016-02-29 16:24:17 UTC

Good! I think the standard GNU paragraph should be printed above it:

PSPP is free software and you are welcome to distribute copies of it
under certain
conditions; refer to "Help > About > License" to see the conditions.
There is
ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY for PSPP; refer to "Help > About > License" for
details.
GNU pspp 0.8.5 (Fri Feb 26 17:51:26 UTC 2016).

-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.

science + technology = better workers

+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)

http://www.alanmead.org

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.

--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development

Mark Hancock

2016-02-29 17:00:12 UTC

I still think a lot of this can be avoided through better and clearer
messaging when downloading the software, but it is also a good idea to have
a message like this in the output, one time.

The suggested text had a few grammatical errors, though, so here are some
fixes:

This is a development version of PSPP. Please be aware of the
likely possibility that it will contain more bugs than a PSPP release.
If you encounter bugs, please consider reporting them to the PSPP
developers at bug-gnu-***@gnu.org, to enable them to be fixed.

I would also recommend replacing "please consider reporting them to..."
with "please report them to..."

Mark

PSPP is free software and you are welcome to distribute copies of it
under certain
conditions; refer to "Help > About > License" to see the conditions.
There is
ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY for PSPP; refer to "Help > About > License" for
details.
GNU pspp 0.8.5 (Fri Feb 26 17:51:26 UTC 2016).
-Alan
--
Alan D. Mead, Ph.D.
President, Talent Algorithms Inc.
science + technology = better workers
+815.588.3846 (Office)
+267.334.4143 (Mobile)
http://www.alanmead.org
I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...
functions on fire in a copy of Orion.
I watched C-Sharp glitter in the dark near a programmable gate.
All those moments will be lost in time, like Ruby... on... Rails... Time for Pi.
--"The Register" user Alister, applying the famous
"Blade Runner" speech to software development
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

Harry Thijssen

2016-03-02 21:53:15 UTC

Hi

First I don't want to be part of the ongoing discussion.
Just to inform you:

The MSWindows installer displays a readme file on the screen during
installation.

The second line in this readme box states:

*This is a new MSWindows build of the PSPP master branch as of the date
this binary was built and includes all fixes and updates till today.
However these updates are not thorougly tested.*

eople have to click on next to continue the installation proces.

The 0.9.0 build including this text is at least downloaded 50.000 times.

Have fun

Alan Mead

2016-03-02 22:05:18 UTC

Harry, this is helpful Thanks!

-Alan

Post by Harry Thijssen
Hi
First I don't want to be part of the ongoing discussion.
The MSWindows installer displays a readme file on the screen during
installation.
/This is a new MSWindows build of the PSPP master branch as of the
date this binary was built and includes all fixes and updates till
today. However these updates are not thorougly tested./
/
/
eople have to click on next to continue the installation proces.
The 0.9.0 build including this text is at least downloaded 50.000 times.
Have fun
_______________________________________________
Pspp-users mailing list
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-users

Friedrich Beckmann

2016-03-03 09:35:21 UTC