response 5 of 85:

Dec 2 15:45 UTC 2010

The reason I was thinking information on how they got their account
was good is that we don't get enough information about how the system
is being used (including how people are finding Grex and getting their
accounts).  We're often making decisions based on annecdotal evidence.
I'd like to avoid that, if possible.

It would be good, at least, to have the "registered" information like we
used to:

registered: Fri Jul 19 16:00:39 1991 on tty /dev/tty01 at speed 2400

Maybe we could add "www" or "command line" to that if it's not obvious
due to the tty.  This information comes from the .plan file, though,
and not a gecos field, as far as I know.

If we can get this information without messing with newuser, then that's
fine, too.

response 7 of 85:

Dec 2 16:50 UTC 2010

resp:5 Newuser already tracks that sort of information and puts it 
into the .plan file; it's just that all the recent users have decided 
to keep their information hidden.  So the registered information is 
there, but private.

Similarly, that information is also logged into a file 
(/var/log/newuser.log).  General users can't read that file for 
obvious reasons.  New newuser logs the data in JSON format, which is 
easy for tools to parse and manipulate.  So we can write programs that 
suck in the newuser log data and do all sorts of statistical analyses 
on them; I agree that more of that and less anecdotal evidence is 
generally a good thing.

Changing newuser is now easy, as the new newuser is much easier to 
maintain than the old newuser.  But I don't think it needs to be 
changed for this as it already does what we're talking about.

resp:6 Yeah, that sounds like the one.  Can anyone read this and see 
if it applies to us?  I kind of think that it doesn't, as we don't 
collect information for "commercial" purposes, and it seems to 
specifically exempt non-profit organizations, but I am now a lawyer 
and all that.

response 9 of 85:

Dec 2 17:07 UTC 2010

I think that point would drive whether we *have* to ask for birthdate 
or not (and, presumably, newuser would have to do something if the 
potential user was under 13 years old).

response 11 of 85:

Dec 2 19:18 UTC 2010

Sounds really overly complex.

response 13 of 85:

Dec 2 19:44 UTC 2010

resp:12 What information are you referring to, specifically?  Right 
now, the stuff we ask for get's put into the user's .plan file.  Well, 
the email address gets used to email the user their new password.  The 
only other real use is for resetting passwords if the user forgets: 
traditionally, this was done via an emailed request; if the user's 
plan is private, but has information that could be used to verify the 
user's identity in it, then staff could look at that and ask the user 
a question based on it to get at least some idea that they are who 
they say they are.  Of course, if the request comes from the email 
address the user used to register, then that's not really necessary.

response 15 of 85:

Dec 3 00:27 UTC 2010

resp:12 nope, darn - me unclear:
1. Strip newuser to the barest minimum.
2. If the user decides to do the mkhomepage/mkplan routine, then ask him
 for stuff - meanwhile highlight the cool home-pages bit in motd and on 
the site

response 17 of 85:

Dec 3 01:45 UTC 2010

When I took a look at the web newuser it was the usual questions about
all the details and settings, so yes, somewhat complicated.  I realize
it isn't complicated for anyone who has set up a Unix acount before, but
for the uninitiated it can be quite complex and confusing.  And time
consuming. If this extra information is not needed for people who want
to access Grex via the web, I'd question the value of collecting it.

I'd probably strip it back to full name, login id, password, optional
telephone number and optional e-mail address, assuming we can use some
default values for the other information like shell, terminal type,
backspace key, etc.  I'd be interested to hear what others think of this
idea.

I tried to run the web newuser on Nov 22 and it failed.  The command
line newuser was successful.  Has there been a change to the web newuser
so that it actually creates an account?  If so, this should be announced
and it would be good if we said something about it on our web page.

I see it still errors out today: 

Your application for an account on Grex has not been processed due to a
system problem.

    * Could not access directory /usr/noton/nu/ 

Sorry. This system error has been logged and will be addressed by our
staff. Please, try again later.

I'd say we probably want at least the Board to hear about this.  We can
discuss at our next meeting, unless we all think it's a good idea to do
it now.  What do the rest of staff think?

response 19 of 85:

Dec 3 02:17 UTC 2010

It's a relatively significant change to an application that's been in
place for eons, so keeping the Board and the rest of staff in the loop
would be good, I think.  It's also good to get multiple opinions on your
question of what exactly needs to be asked by newuser.  We don't usually
get opinions from many people in coop.

Anyway, I understand about other priorities, so don't feel you need to
attend to Grex constantly.  I see the error I got out of the web newuser
was different than the one I had on Nov 22, so something maybe changed.
It doesn't look like it's too far off from working if the most recent
message is accurate.  

In the short term, what we need is to have the web newuser working as it
used to, using the old program.  If that's easy to do, great, it'll give
us more time to hash out the details of any changes.  If not, then we'll
just have to be patient.

response 21 of 85:

Dec 3 03:12 UTC 2010

Looks like /usr/noton/nu doesn't exist so that's why I got that error.
But if the new one is easier to get in place and it works, that might be
better (and more maintainable).

response 23 of 85:

Dec 3 15:23 UTC 2010

Here's what I see we need to do, in order of priority:

  1. Get the web newuser working.  If that means getting it working
     as it did when it was last working, with all the questions and
     technical stuff, so be it.  Not having it working at all is more of
     a harm to us than a complicated new user process.

  2. Simplify the web newuser.  From what I've seen we should be able to
     do this if we have a working web newuser and just use some default
     values or no values for options, for the things we're no longer
     asking (in the data submitted from the web page).  If this is not
     the case, speak up.

     The "how" (or "how much") to simplify is one of those consensus
     questions we get from time to time.  Let's give the Board and Staff
     and the rest of the users some time to weigh in.  Perhaps they see
     other issues with any simplification proposal.  If we hear nothing
     in a reasonable amount of time (e.g. 1 week), I'll assume no one
     has an objection.  Then let's simplify it and see how it works out.

Let me know if you see issues with this process (such as it's more work
to re-do the web newuser or web page to simplify it than it is to just
take the time to simplify all of it now).  We can adjust accordingly.

(I've also e-mailed staff and board with a summary of what we're talking
about in this item).

response 25 of 85:

Dec 3 16:21 UTC 2010

I understand your point of view, Dan.  Maybe it's time to not try so
hard for a consensus or the involvement of others and just get things
done.  From what I've seen, generally, the people who care have little
or no interest in actually making things happen, so I'm tempted to just
say "do it this way" and let the chips fall where they may.

response 27 of 85:

Dec 3 18:25 UTC 2010

resp:25 Thanks, Kent.  Don't get me wrong, consensus is good, but it's 
also this community's achillies heel.

resp:26 Quick!  Someone upload slynne's post to wikileaks!