On 8/18/20 2:34 AM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote: > On 8/17/20 11:04 PM, Rich Bowen wrote: >> A few days ago I got email from a user who was attempting to install >> CentOS. I've included their full message below, but, to summarize, >> when one clicks on the "CentOS Linux" link on the front page of >> centos.org one is given a matrix of choices, and no guidance. On >> choosing one option - say, x84_64 ISO, one is then given another list >> of options and no guidance. Pick one of *those* options and you are >> yet again given a list of options and no guidance. >> >> Now, it could be argued that someone who doesn't know what to choose >> is not our target audience, and I suppose that would be an ok >> position to hold. But wouldn't it be great to lower the bar just a >> little, and offer some guidance as to which links one should click? >> >> I'd like to see several things: >> >> 1) On the front page, where it says "We offer two Linux distros:", >> there would be at least some hint of what this choice entails >> >> 2) On the download page - https://www.centos.org/centos-linux/ - a >> little explanation of what the various options there are. >> >> So far, this is all just edits to centos.org. The next two steps >> involve pushing changes to the mirror network, and I honestly have no >> idea what is involved there. >> >> 3) Adding phrasing to >> http://isoredirect.centos.org/centos/8/isos/x86_64/ that indicates >> what that inscrutable list of links means. >> >> and finally, possibly not even possible: >> >> 4) Add words to http://centos4.zswap.net/8.2.2004/isos/x86_64/ (as a >> random example) that say what the various options mean. This is >> probably not possible, since these are just autoindex generated >> pages. We could, however, offer Apache httpd and nginx configuration >> recommendations which will provide that additional information for >> sites that chose to follow the instructions. Oh, sweet. I just noticed that below the /8/isos tree there is no description similar to http://centos4.zswap.net/7/isos/x86_64/0_README.txt. Wonderful choice, dropping each and every hint that [barely] existed. >> >> And, really, #1 and #2 are the most important here. >> > Rich, I fully agree with that user and frankly, I command him for > reaching out and telling you ( and us ) his concerns. I for one would > have quit and not looked back. Been there, done that. > > Leaving that aside, AFAIK the main web site is not under community > control. It was taken over by RedHat eons ago ( not that it was > accessible for us, the members of the CentOS teams, before that anyway > ) and I bet that there are most 5 people who can modify it. If memory > serves I am part of the wiki translation team for 12 years or so and > AFAIK none of those who can edit the wiki had ever had any sort of > influence on the pages published on www.c.o. We actually had to _beg_ > to have links in the main website point to the wiki ( which _was_ > under our control ) so that we could publish information we thought > that could/would be useful for the users. > > > In an ideal world, we would have some sort of AJAX that would > dynamically describe each and every iso link on the main pages of the > web site. But that's a job for web designers and content publishers. I > fully recommend to whoever will be tasked with this project to look at > the wiki maintained by the arch community. THAT is how things should > be done, from my point of view. And, with all due respect, I mean that > as opposed to access.r.c and www.r.c which are awful to navigate > unless you know exactly what you want.. and sometimes not even then. > > wolfy > > > PS: I created the very very first 0_README.txt file that is now > included in the isos/$ARCH folder. A file which usually is ignored for > the simple reason that end users almost never reach it but whose > content should be published BEFORE the users attempt to download an iso. > > > >> The full message follows: >> >> >> >> I stumbled on your address on a Centos Faq page. I hope you can give me >> some sort of answer. >> I have been searching for a way to ask a question, but have not located >> a forum. As I am fairly new to Linux generally, I am exploring >> varieties, and Centos surfaced as an interesting option. But, again, I >> have a problem no one else considers worthy of asking or answering: how >> do I choose? Apparently the user in the download directory is supposed >> to know what they are looking for. >> When I followed the link to "download CentOs", I chose a link with >> ".iso" on it. This opened another page, so I picked another likely >> candidate. I went four or five branches deep before I gave up. I have no >> idea why I would want one branch or the other. Should I just leave >> CentOs to the experts? >> I really wish that on the home page there was a specification for "user >> level". Do developers assume that the user is expert, and that someone >> who is not qualified will get exhausted and go away? It seems very >> unkind to make that assumption and not say so. If I am not the intended >> user, please tell me! Otherwise, could someone please explain how to >> choose which version of CentOs to use? >> If you could forward this letter to someone who can take the time to >> answer my question, I will be grateful. >> <<