The new Web UI is currently present in Fedora Rawhide Workstation and is planned for Fedora 40.
The initial design (the last screen of the installation Wizard):
Of course, for that it is. If anaconda is a own project it probably makes sense to get an own tag like: #anaconda-team in the category “Project Discussion”
For now we could put it in “Project Discussion” devel if devel stands for development?!
As you proposed I find it is well chosen. We probably could create a feedback site as an overview and link to all discussion chanels/teams and mention the documentation of it: Fedora Documentation :: Fedora Docs see the (Fedora Project & Community) section. I would not shorten the URL because of readability.
(Just my personal toughs)
Would it be better to have a survey created for this purpose explicitly? That way people can give feedback without needing a Fedora account to participate, thus widening the amount of feedback you can get. I believe @akashdeep runs our surveys typically so he may be able to help.
To that end, if you have a survey you can just use the QR code and cut down on choice paralysis.
To further this idea, is there a way you could prompt people for feedback after the installation is complete? You could repeat the QR code or provide a link that can be clicked. Maybe you could have it be a tab that opens on first launch of Firefox? Just ideas here.
Yes, but to aggregate the comments into usable data may take some effort. Perhaps polls would help with granularity, but likely only after discussion has taken place.
Not as many here know that the installer is called Anaconda, is my opinion though, so it may not be the fact. I would use installation as it exists now, possibly anaconda too since it exists, and this post should really be under a different category, say Project Discussion.
Hi! Some background: Some on the team initially wanted to do feedback via forms or inside of Anaconda itself. And I wanted a questionnaire, and would’ve loved to have some “user study” conversations.
However:
We’re (rightfully) concentrating more on Anaconda-related features than to create a custom interface within Anaconda itself. The extra work we’d have to do to have a feedback UI within Anaconda would take away from other, more important Anaconda development.
We really want to use Fedora infrastructure.
Fedora has no infra for questionnaires and we don’t want to use some proprietary service (especially one that requires yet another account).
We apparently cannot have an anonymous form or place to collect feedback, as that could be spammed. Sadly, that means having an account. Accounts dramatically complicate things. We don’t want someone to have to go through a rather fragile and error prone flow of creating and/or signing into an account, which may even require using email (for email verification or a password reset) which may rely on 2FA and can also be tied to a password manager (if someone has an account) that is either a separate app with a password store and/or a web browser (possibly with an add-on).
Therefore, after a lot of discussion, the best approach available to us was mentioned in the top post, but I’ll reiterate with some details:
Use Fedora infrastructure. This is almost assuredly discussion.fedoraproject.org (the forums here). It requires an account, but it’s a Fedora account, at least.
Have a way to open it off-device. Most people using Fedora are probably familiar enough with QR codes and have a phone that can read QR codes (most even in the normal camera app), so we should use that.
Have a memorable and short URL, ideally some redirect that is pointed to somewhere on discussion.fedoraproject.org. Someone should be able to remember it (hopefully) or at least manually type it in (based on writing it down or taking a picture with a phone or camera). Or, if they have a second computer, they could easily type it in there.
The same short, memorable URL should also be linked from the Fedora 40 announcement, in blog posts, perhaps the default Fedora page in Firefox, and from social media. It’d serve as a reminder and a way for people to not have to remember anything. (We cannot really have it in a first boot experience as that’s not really the place for this — at least not without extra work per desktop environment. But in the browser? Sure; we already have a default page; hopefully we can get it there.)
(BTW: If you click the link inside of Anaconda, it would open in another window… but you’d be on your own. It’s not going to be a great experience, as it’s not a full desktop environment and we cannot provide a full desktop environment. We’d just give you a browser window… that’s it. The best experience is really to open it on your phone or take note of it to fill it out later with a browser on a desktop.)
Additionally, the mockup above is a little out of date. This one is the same idea, but with some minor adjustments I meant to make earlier:
(It’s basically the same idea, with a few text changes: putting the emphasis on installation, and changing “anaconda” to “installer” in the URL.)
So I did do a Rawhide install but at the end I did not get the barcode or link to feedback, is this due to not yet having the placeholder for the link? (ie the topic created).
If it would be helpful, there is a new “form template” feature for Discourse. We could set up a special category (under Team Workflows, maybe?) which has a customized form for the kind of feedback you’re looking for.
However, I wonder if it might be better to use LimeSurvey? That way, people don’t need to have an account and can give anonymous feedback, which might feel more comfortable.
At the end of the survey, we could link here and ask people to give further impressions if they want to discuss more.
If we do want to get an increment of Fedora Community members we should not avoid a subscription. We should encourage them to participate to improve the WebUi with their short feedback and reward them with a welcome badge. Because the WebUi will be the first alias second impression while installing Fedora. The webpage and the download will be the first one
About privacy we should promote this as an outstanding independent attribute of the community, that we do respect it and that we even give them the clarity how we do manage. All ways to let them choose.
If we do make something here in Discourse we also just could export it as a html document and use it as a simple form to give feedback on the website.
I understand the sentiment, but a survey is just a survey. If we make it so there are too many steps involved you will lose some that may have valid opinions because they couldn’t be bothered to sign on to yet another social media site.
That’s why I said to export the survey to html and post it on the website as a simple form (no registration needed, maximum agree to store a session cooky that it is possible to distinguish if the same device is giving multiple feedback). And/Or Creating in discourse a website user and gather the info with it to discourse. So we do have also a feedback how much anonymous survey takers we get.
We can also make on the Fedora website a form where people could log in with an existing Social media account they already have. This way they also advertise Fedora Linux in their timeline for example (Facebook, Twitter, Mastodon. etc.)
For every software nowadays you can sign up to support and to get support. When users get from beginning on the feeling that we do like to get their meaning, and also invite to participate in the community, then we certainly gain more.
If we do have once a workflow how to gather such kind of information, we can use it for almost everything (respecting all the different preferences).
We do have a lot of new software to be implemented soon, and certain we need and want the users feedback.
And it is not about a sentiment, it is just about sharing ideas how to cover different tasks to reach the ambiguous goals Fedora has.
Well, there needs to be some back-end processing and storage to record the answers for that kind of thing. Rather than coding a one-off, we already have access to Limesurvey for this kind of thing — it’s open source, hosted, and takes care of the various compliance things surveys can bring up.
discussion!
