On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 18:17 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Agreed, but the question is: How much can we simplify something without > loosing it's functionality? Of course we could argue how much > functionality users need, but for the target audience of the Fedora > workstation, something like port forwards are not rocket science abut > actually a use case. If we assume the user is familiar with basic computer networking (and I guess many developers are not!), then yes, port forwards aren't rocket science. But that's also a very unusual thing to need to do with Fedora Workstation's firewall. Almost all Fedora users who need to forward a port will want to forward a port from their home router TO their Fedora machine, not FROM Fedora to someplace else, so the port forwarding options in firewall-config can't possibly be helpful and would only be confusing. I'm sure some people are happy users of firewalld port forwarding and it's great that that's possible, but that seems like a really fringe use case. > When I was > no longer able to configure the display brightness on battery > independently from the brightness on AC, I had to ditch > gnome-power-manager in favor of xfce4-power-manager. Needing a brighter > display on the train than at home is not exactly an exotic use case, > still too exotic for gnome-power-manager. gnome-power-manager meaning the overcomplicated standalone app? :D But I agree that our screen brightness configuration in gnome-control-center (probably much simpler than whatever gnome-power-manager, which I'm not about to install, presents) is problematic at least. I'm sliding it around right now on F20 and it doesn't seem to work at all. I guess it only changes brightness when not plugged in? But my computer is a desktop that's always plugged in. So I'm a very confused user right now. Sometimes it is possible to simplify too much. > > For example, today someone objected to the removal of firewall-config on > > Google+. His argument was basically this: "how else will I be able to > > turn off the firewall?" I read that as: "I need to turn off my firewall > > because it is too complicated for me, and I won't be able to do > > something otherwise." Now he's less secure. (That's not an argument in > > favor of removing firewall-config, but one in favor of the new > > permissive Workstation firewall configuration.) > > I don't think so. Reasonably defaults are certainly a starting point, > but as soon as they don't match the users need, they will need to adjust > the settings. And at this point disabling the firewall is certainly > worse than opening a port. Of course, but I'm really not sure where you're going with this argument. To disable the firewall, you must first install firewall-config. (I assume users capable of disabling the firewall via the command line are also capable of installing firewall-config. :)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
