Why the Automatix effort should be focused on BUMPS.

[endersshadow]

mstlyevil said to start a thread if I felt like talking about this, so here it is.

Here's my argument:

arnieboy has called for community development (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=177646) of the Automatix for Dapper. I personally feel that this is a waste of both community resources and community intellect. arnieboy wants to do in 15 days what BUMPS (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=138889) has already accomplished in two and a half months. BUMPS has had initial success and praise, and is at a fairly stable state at the current moment.

I'm not advocating choosing BUMPS over Automatix or Automatix over BUMPS. The fact of the matter is that Automatix does not exist for Dapper, but BUMPS does. And, contrary to mstlyevil's claims that BUMPS is temporary, BUMPS is here to stay and is currently being actively developed and tested by Iandefor. Though, he could certainly use community support to make his project enter the complexity that Automatix is currently at.

My point is this: Instead of trying to write and perfect a program in 15 days, why not use those 15 days to perfect a program already written that accomplishes the same tasks? It seems to me to be an incredibly foolish waste of community resources to have two automation projects, especially when one has only been proposed to this point. This isn't about who has the better program or who's a bigger contributor to the community. This is about what aids the community the most. At the moment, for Dapper, BUMPS is the only answer. It would seem incredibly foolish to me to throw that away.

The point of this community is to help eachother create the best computing experience possible. I feel that the energy needed to do this is best spent on something that already has a solid foundation instead of trying to rewrite it. The fact of the matter is that many multimedia codecs and plugins have changed for Dapper over Breezy. There's no reason for the community to try to recreate Automatix for Dapper when it's already been written with BUMPS and has been tested and retested on Dapper for the past two months.

It seems to me that the best use of community resources would be to polish BUMPS up and add functionality to it that people would like to see. This isn't about support one app over another. This is about coming together as a community to accomplish a goal. If arnieboy wishes to go foward with his community call for Automatix for Dapper and ignore BUMPS, that's his perogative. Open Source Software is all about building on top of knowledge already gained and problems already solved. This model has worked time and again, and that knowledge and solution has already been founded in BUMPS, which took its lead from Automatix for Breezy. The best thing that this community can do for itself is help create a better automation program for the community, not for brand name. Our resources and intellect are better spent on solving new problems rather than coming up with a solution to long-since-been-solved problems.

If we do not take the opportunity to use these 15 days wisely to create the best automation program possible by building on top of BUMPS, the world won't end, and things will go on. But this community will be lacking a solid, unified, and widely accepted automation project that it had in Breezy. These 15 days are best spent solving new problems, not writing a new program from the ground up, especially one that has no core developer or even developer, for that matter.

This is my call for the community to acknowledge, accept, and better BUMPS not for any individual agenda, but for the betterment of the community and the thousands or millions of users that will be installing Dapper and want an easy solution to a tedious problem. If we put the support and the effort into BUMPS in these next 15 days, it will be 1000x better than anything that we could write and/or test in those same days.

And I'll leave you with one quote to sum up this entire post:
"This is the spring formal, and my date's the truth. Tonight, we're going all the way." - Stephen Colbert

[Iandefor]

Just so everyone knows, I'm gonna try to keep my nose out of this, except for technical questions. We'll see how well that goes, though :).

I will say this, though: I'd really love some more substantial community support, but if people want to support Automatix rather than BUMPS, it's their call.

[briancurtin]

i agreed with you in the other thread, and i agree even more with you after reading this.

[aysiu]

Can I just clarify something, since I know almost nothing about programming?

You say Automatix doesn't yet exist for Dapper. It does, however, exist for Breezy. Given the code to create Automatix, how difficult would it be to update for Dapper?

Can you or someone else explain to use laypeople how complex a task this would be and some of what it would involve?

[endersshadow]

Can I just clarify something, since I know almost nothing about programming?

You say Automatix doesn't yet exist for Dapper. It does, however, exist for Breezy. Given the code to create Automatix, how difficult would it be to update for Dapper?

Can you or someone else explain to use laypeople how complex a task this would be and some of what it would involve?

The repos would have to be changed and the dependencies tested and matched correctly, as well as the packages for the codecs and plugins done correctly. Flash is completely revamped for Dapper, as are many other things. Automatix would have to test its installation and keep tweaking for this and that. My point is that BUMPS has already done all of this tweaking and testing in these past two months along with the development of Dapper, so it would be foolish to redo all of the work that Iandefor has put forth.

[brodock]

i've never used BUMP, but i think it's similar to Automatix... so it's reinvent the wheel.

the point of the post is to say that: bump is going to do the same as automatix... as (for dapper) it is quite stable and quite done... so make another program that do exactly the same old thing... is the same as if we re-create another apt-get command that make you install debian packages from a repository...

as people said, automatix seens to be more "hard-coded" and "hard to maintein" then BUMP, so for end user will have no change. instead of opening automatix, you are going to open BUMP and the rest is the same.

[helpme]

What about Easyubuntu?
Doesn't it run on dapper and isn't it supposed to do roughtly the same, or am I just misunderstanding things, as is so often the case?

[endersshadow]

What about Easyubuntu?
Doesn't it run on dapper and isn't it supposed to do roughtly the same, or am I just misunderstanding things, as is so often the case?

It currently only runs on Breezy, to the best of my knowledge.

[endersshadow]

I'd like to just clarify something very quickly. This thread is not meant to be a bash on Automatix or on arnieboy. Whatever arnieboy decides to do himself is completely up to him--he's a free man and can do whatever he pleases. Moreover, Automatix is a great program for Breezy, and I've used it many times in the past. This thread is solely about the best course of action for the community as regards automation programs. It is not about one versus another. Rather, it is about optimizing allocation and effort.

Please keep any beef you may have with arnieboy or Automatix out of this thread, and I will ask the moderators to please delete any posts which insults and/or flames arnieboy and/or Automatix, or at least edit them.

I wanted to make that clear because this should be a debate about the community, and not about individuals.

[brodock]

maybe a poll can do a better job...
like:

What you people want?
- Automatix, EasyUbuntu and Bump : Cause we want to choose the one we like more
- Just one of the is enogh, it's about usability.

the point of the topic is a try to turn bump easyubuntu and automatix in one thing only... like everybody supporting one of then instead of dividing efforts to do exactly the same thing (3 times).

[endersshadow]

maybe a poll can do a better job...
like:

What you people want?
- Automatix, EasyUbuntu and Bump : Cause we want to choose the one we like more
- Just one of the is enogh, it's about usability.

the point of the topic is a try to turn bump easyubuntu and automatix in one thing only... like everybody supporting one of then instead of dividing efforts to do exactly the same thing (3 times).

I won't make this a poll because I don't want people to be gridlocked into choices. I'd rather have a civil discussion about the best course of action rather than pigeon-holing the subject at hand.

[helpme]

It currently only runs on Breezy, to the best of my knowledge.
I searched around a bit and it seems to me it runs on dapper:
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=165724
http://easyubuntu.freecontrib.org/get.html

This release support Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu, Breezy/Dapper, x86/powerpc/amd64!

Disclaimer: I haven't tried it, so I can't comment on how good it actually runs on dapper.

[endersshadow]

I searched around a bit and it seems to me it runs on dapper:
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=165724
http://easyubuntu.freecontrib.org/get.html


Disclaimer: I haven't tried it, so I can't comment on how good it actually runs on dapper.

Great, I'm glad they've ported it.

My point that the community call for development of Automatix would be better served building on top of BUMPS rather than writing an automation script from the ground up still stands, though.

[manicka]

It seems to me that Automatix just needs some willing bodies to update the scripts and modify it for Dapper. That would certainly be achieveable in the next 15 days.

Ultimately it would be nice if we could bring all 3 efforts together as one, but considering the history of two of them that is hardly likely to happen. In the long run I can't see to many problems with all 3 projects existing. After all, Linux is all about choice in the long run.

[manicka]

My point that the community call for development of Automatix would be better served building on top of BUMPS rather than writing an automation script from the ground up still stands, though.

I think you'll find that technically this point is incorrect. Automatix for Dapper would not be a rewrite from scratch/the ground up, rather just a modification/update of the existing code.

Perhaps Arnie could clarify :)

[kabus]

Why, after all the fuss about Automatix, does BUMPS use '--force-yes' ?

[endersshadow]

It seems to me that Automatix just needs some willing bodies to update the scripts and modify it for Dapper. That would certainly be achieveable in the next 15 days.

Ultimately it would be nice if we could bring all 3 efforts together as one, but considering the history of two of them that is hardly likely to happen. In the long run I can't see to many problems with all 3 projects existing. After all, Linux is all about choice in the long run.

My point is that it wouldn't be as thoroughly tested as BUMPS is currently, which could potentially spawn a plethora of support requests due to buggy coding simply due to a lack of time.

You're right: 3 projects wouldn't be a bad thing in the long run, and that's not what I'm advocating. Linux is about choice. All I'm saying is that we have 15 days to put forth an excellent automation program, and that we should have a discussion about which avenue would best fit this need, and that's what this thread set out to be: My opinion about which avenue we, as a community, should take, and I've already made my point in this arena. If Automatix gets off the ground in 15 days and is a solid program, then hats off to it. I have nothing against the program. My concern is just that the porting of that to Dapper is time used inefficiently when time is definitely a factor.


I think you'll find that technically this point is incorrect. Automatix for Dapper would not be a rewrite from scratch/the ground up, rather just a modification/update of the existing code.

Perhaps Arnie could clarify :)

I've clarified what would need to be done in Automatix for it to be ported to Dapper before in this thread. It would need to do all the bug testing of the installation of the new packages--testing that BUMPS has done and been successful at.

[endersshadow]

Why, after all the fuss about Automatix, does BUMPS use '--force-yes' ?

This is a question to be asked in this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=138889), and not here.

[Mathias-K]

I'm not really into programming, so please correct me if this is not correct:

BUMPS is a command line-based script for installing multimedia functionality in Ubuntu.

Automatix is a graphical program both customized for Gnome and KDE that let's the user install multimedia functionality as well as browsers, programs and other things. 44 things in total.

To me, they seem very different. Would your "plan" involve BUMPS reaching a level of functionality anywhere near that of Automatix?

[endersshadow]

I'm not really into programming, so please correct me if this is not correct:

BUMPS is a command line-based script for installing multimedia functionality in Ubuntu.

Automatix is a graphical program both customized for Gnome and KDE that let's the user install multimedia functionality as well as browsers, programs and other things. 44 things in total.

To me, they seem very different. Would your "plan" involve BUMPS reaching a level of functionality anywhere near that of Automatix?

BUMPS is a graphical interface.

And I don't have a plan...all I'm asking is where community effort is best spent preparing these for Dapper.

[manicka]

I believe that there will be less effort involved in updating Automatix compared to trying to add features to Bump to match the capabilities of Automatix .

[mstlyevil]

You still have to run BUMPS through the shell to get it to work properly. Also BUMPS does not have all the packages available in it that Automatix does so extensive testing would be required to update BUMPS to include all the packages that are currently available in Automatix. Either way you have a tall order to fill in 15 days.

Both projects complement one another. BUMPS should remain in my opinion a lightweight way to install codecs and Java for those that want nothing more. Automatix and Easy Ubuntu should remain a way to get the most popular packages using a easy GUI. There is room for all three projects IMHO.

I just think it is misleading to compare Automatix to BUMPS since both have entirely different approaches and will appeal to different users. If Iandefor wants to expand BUMPS then the staff will consider giving him the same option for a subforum that both Automatix and Easy Ubuntu have. Everyone will be treated fairly by the staff of this forum.

[woedend]

While I personally HATE the idea of either, I cannot see how the two even really compare. Automatix seems much more intuitive, easy to use, and offers more. Bumps just seems like a cheap tiny script that I would write in a couple minutes to make my reinstalls go faster(a good idea...but not to be used by other people, especially new users). (no offense to the authors of either, please)
But I really think that a user should know exactly what they are installing, how to add repo's, and at the very least how to use synaptic so that they don't rely on such a 'featureless frontend to a less featureless frontend' later on.
I know when I was new what helped me the MOST was reading step by step guides by Stanton Finley and ubuntuguide and that's how I would suggest any new user learn.

[awakatanka]

Would a call for community help by BUMPS also made sticky?

[helpme]

Bumps just seems like a cheap tiny script that I would write in a couple minutes to make my reinstalls go faster(a good idea...but not to be used by other people, especially new users). (no offense to the authors of either, please)

If the authors are not supposed to take offense, is it ok if I do?
Really, I find it amazing how people feel entitled to belittle the efforts of other people.



But I really think that a user should know exactly what they are installing, how to add repo's, and at the very least how to use synaptic so that they don't rely on such a 'featureless frontend to a less featureless frontend' later on.
I know when I was new what helped me the MOST was reading step by step guides by Stanton Finley and ubuntuguide and that's how I would suggest any new user learn.
While I agree that learning is certainly a good thing, I don't see how it should be a requirement. After all, Ubuntu is an operating system, not a learning tool.

[Caseyjp]

I can't help but respond to woedend's post. It's all fine and good for a user to learn how stuff works...unfortunately or fortunately, this ain't the distro for that. Ubuntu is supposed to "just work", remember? Currently for a lot of the non-free/license vague, or the needed but 'illegal in certain countries' apps/utilities/drivers, these applications are ABSOLUTELY necessary to get the user who DOESN'T want to learn the OS, or doesn't have the TIME to learn it. They are also amazingly helpful to the administrator who needs to install a single box or two and doesn't want to go through the 'checklist' of scripts for every build.
These applications are what have SOLD many converts to this operating system over many other distros that don't have ability to get them running on a par with a windows box in a quick amount of time.

While multiple choice is better than one single option, rushing is NOT good for any release, especially this one.

My vote is for both, but not to rush either. If they aren't ready for dapper, then they sure as heck will be for edgy...but then that's just my 2 cents. :)

[woedend]

If the authors are not supposed to take offense, is it ok if I do?
Really, I find it amazing how people feel entitled to belittle the efforts of other people.


While I agree that learning is certainly a good thing, I don't see how it should be a requirement. After all, Ubuntu is an operating system, not a learning tool.


To me, I was not belittling the author or his efforts.... Perhaps my wording was bad to some, i did not mean it to be - but really a command line script of this nature is more of a time saver than a new user saver. This is my opinion and i'm sure it will not change - don't let it offend you.
Yes, ubuntu is an operating system. Just like your car is a car, and your feet are feet. Nobody would call your feet a learning tool, nor your car...but if you don't learn how to use them to drive or walk correctly then you are doing yourself a big injustice...no? That's quite a poor argument.

[mstlyevil]

Would a call for community help by BUMPS also made sticky?

You would have to ask the admins about that one. If it was done after the month Automatix call is over then I would probally say it would be allowed to sticky for the same amount of time.

[richbarna]

Most newbies I know now have Automatix installed due to 100's of threads regarding problems with various applications.
I have used automatix and I think it is a newbie godsend.
As woedend said :-
"I know when I was new what helped me the MOST was reading step by step guides by Stanton Finley and ubuntuguide and that's how I would suggest any new user learn."
I couldn't agree more, because I use the console by choice.
Most newbies will post a question on a forum, get told to use automatix, get it automatically from the repository via adept etc. and problems all solved by a nice GUI program that is easy to use.
I will be upgrading my main machine to Dapper, and for the sake of newbies that come over from windows, I would still recommend Automatix.
Then once they can listen to their music, watch films etc., I will recommend guides on using the terminal/console and BASH commands as a continuing learning process.

[Mathias-K]

BUMPS is a graphical interface.

And I don't have a plan...all I'm asking is where community effort is best spent preparing these for Dapper.

Well i think focus should be on Automatix. It has way more features and is a very nice tool.

[awakatanka]

Would it be possible to merge the 2 in 1? So the 2 benefits from both work that is already done. And name it autobump ourso.

I have the feeling that bumps was made because automatix wouldn't be made for dapper.

[kabus]

Is there a reason that speaks against 'focusing the community efforts' on EasyUbuntu ?
It seems to offer similar functionality to the other two solutions and additionally supports PPC and AMD64 architectures, which makes it more universally useful.

[tseliot]

I agree with Manicka and Mstlyevil. Automatix does NOT need to be written from scratch. "Porting" Automatix to Dapper means changing the name of some packages and replacing some commands with others.

It's not hard. Think that sometimes ago I managed to make a customised version of Automtix for my personal usage.

You should think that Automatix is not some cryptic program but mainly a shell script using Zenity. And it's been written in a "clear" way.

I think that Automatix is much more than a "brand": it's an easy GUI to enable the average Joe (and the lazy like me ;) ) to install the non-free and proprietary packages. It takes just a few mouse clicks and you have all that without much of a hassle.

I find it indispensable to Breezy, and so (IMHO) it should be to Dapper. It made my friends' switch from Windows MUCH easier.


If it weren't for my exams I would port Automatix myself... :(

BUMPS is good project as well but I don't see the point of stopping the development of Automatix (which is DIFFERENT) because of its existence.

My 2 cents.

[manicka]

Spot on tseliot :),

I believe our efforts would be better spent on supporting Arnie's efforts to create a team to get Automatix ready for Dapper

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=177646

[mstlyevil]

I agree tseliot and manicka. There is just room for all of them.

[Lord Illidan]

As I see it, we have 3 scripts jockeying for pole position.

Automatix can be ported to Dapper in 15 days, I don't see what's so hard about it. If I didn't have exams, I would give it a try. As it is, Automatix for Breezy is a good program.

BUMPs. I haven't used it yet, and neither easyubuntu.

However, I believe that we have 2 scripts too many. Do we really need 3 different scripts to accomplish the same thing? Why can't arnieboy, iandefor and the creators of EasyUbuntu collaborate to make one real good program? That would be good.

[mstlyevil]

As I see it, we have 3 scripts jockeying for pole position.

Automatix can be ported to Dapper in 15 days, I don't see what's so hard about it. If I didn't have exams, I would give it a try. As it is, Automatix for Breezy is a good program.

BUMPs. I haven't used it yet, and neither easyubuntu.

However, I believe that we have 2 scripts too many. Do we really need 3 different scripts to accomplish the same thing? Why can't arnieboy, iandefor and the creators of EasyUbuntu collaborate to make one real good program? That would be good.

EasyUbuntu and Automatix collaborating is not going to happen because of a difference in opinion between the creators of both.

The jury is still out on BUMPS and Automatix collaborating. Trust me when I say there are people working to get Automatix and Bumps to collaborate. That does not mean the two projects have to merge since they both cater to a different niche.

I like the fact that there are three different projects with three different approaches to the same ends. Linux is about having a choice and three different multimedia projects for ubuntu is in line with that spirit.

[Iandefor]

After having slept on it, I've come to a conclusion or two.

BUMPS has a different goal than Automatix, so merging them wouldn't work all that well. Automatix is sort of like an all-in-one script, which installs a bunch of things many users would find handy. BUMPS is geared primarily towards multimedia and compatibility. So an 'autobumps' project wouldn't really work all that well, in my opinion. It would be similar to merging AbiWord with Gnumeric.

Second, it may be easier if support was funneled from Automatix to BUMPS, since BUMPS is a simpler script, but I think Automatix, since its' functions are more broad, would, in the long run, serve the general purposes of the community better. It solves more problems and performs more tasks than BUMPS does, so putting a lot of community effort into polishing up Automatix would probably be better for the community than doing the same for BUMPS.

I'll address some things that have been said in this thread already.


Why, after all the fuss about Automatix, does BUMPS use '--force-yes' ? So the apt portion of the script isn't filled with prompts. Take it up with me more directly if you have a problem with it.


You still have to run BUMPS through the shell to get it to work properly Not true. Just double-click on the script and select run. I guess I could update the documentation to reflect this, though.


Spot on tseliot :smile:,

I believe our efforts would be better spent on supporting Arnie's efforts to create a team to get Automatix ready for Dapper

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=177646 I agree. I definitely think that the community would be served more by a general scrambling to get Automatix more polished by June 1st.

[mstlyevil]

Excellent post Iandefor. You are a very wise and mature person.

[tseliot]

Excellent post Iandefor. You are a very wise and mature person.
I agree with you.

A big =D> for Iandefor ;)

[Lord Illidan]

Always nice whent things are kept civil, and I praise Iandefor for that.

I didn't know that Automatix and Bumps were essentially different. Now that Iandefor said that Bumps was a multimedia script, I see things better.

This still leaves Easy Ubuntu out though. I dunno what it is doing here... no offence to the devs, but I hope it is not just to spite Arnieboy by doing a fork.

[kabus]

So the apt portion of the script isn't filled with prompts. Take it up with me more directly if you have a problem with it.


I already asked in the appropriate thread endersshadow pointed me to, but since I now know your answer kindly ignore that.
Just as a sidenote I have no intention to 'take it up with you', and I have no problem either since no one forces me to use your script.
I was only asking a rather simple and, in my eyes, reasonable question.

[kabus]

This still leaves Easy Ubuntu out though. I dunno what it is doing here... no offence to the devs, but I hope it is not just to spite Arnieboy by doing a fork.

Well if they want to spite someone by releasing a highly useful and safety-conscious application that supports lots of architectures then more power to them...

[Lord Illidan]

Well if they want to spite someone by releasing a highly useful and safety-conscious application that supports lots of architectures then more power to them...

Safety-conscious?:rolleyes:

[mstlyevil]

Lets not turn this into a flame war now between Automatix and EasyUbuntu. Both projects are great and if they don't see eye to eye, so what. Choice is good for the community.

Edit: After talking with the staff it has been decided the authors of both Automatix and BUMPS see no need for debate since they have different goals in mind and are not in competition. Therefore this thread has out lived it's usefulness and is being closed.