Remaking the eBox sidebar (discussion help needed)

[Saturn2888]

Yeah, the graphic is the structure currently in place we want to get rid of. We should, though, make sure to keep with the developer's current vision of 5 compartments, semi-overlapping unless we're given a green light to rethink that too.

[SamK]

We should, though, make sure to keep with the developer's current vision of 5 compartments, semi-overlapping...

The agreement is essential and does require input from the devs (Javi?) but it may be possible to produce a solution that is not "semi-overlapping".

I don't want to belabor this point but this is where the model approach I outlined earlier in the thread is useful.

[Saturn2888]

I'm all for the functional names rather than the module ones for instance or have the modules also have function names. Then, if someone wanted, they could enable specific parts of the Instant Messenger plugin by enabling Jabber and Made-Up-IM-Server-Name if they felt like it. Right?

[SamK]

I'm all for the functional names rather than the module ones for instance or have the modules also have function names. Then, if someone wanted, they could enable specific parts of the Instant Messenger plugin by enabling Jabber and Made-Up-IM-Server-Name if they felt like it. Right?

My preference is for descriptive names rather than module/package names.  Using both seems clumsy and confusing.  I would stick with what it does rather than what it is.

I try to view this from the standpoint of a user who is new to eBox, many of these will be Windows users.  They will know what function they are trying to configure and the names of the underlying packages and files are irrelevant to that goal.

Users with some eBox and/or Linux experience may no longer question the use of package names as they have become accustomed with it.  It doen't mean that it must always remain that way.

[Saturn2888]

I mean, you can have the "what it is" in some kind of advanced configuration if you want to have add-on packages. That's just leaving for future enhancement. I should first ask if the devs are going to use other kinds of groupware or something else other than Samba for instance. If not, I guess that problem's solved.

[SamK]

I should first ask if the devs are going to use other kinds of groupware or something else other than Samba for instance.

It may be possible to design a structure that will accommodate changes such as these.  Again the input from the devs has cropped up.  The redesign is such a central part of using eBox that it will be difficult to do without establishing what it is to achieve.

[Saturn2888]

I guess so. Javi! . I guess we should wait for more information then so we can figure out what there is to work with.

I think the best ideas so far are having some sort of Gmail-like label system where modules aren't put into folders, they just have labels attached. Labels act like folders but it's like, if you look inside of a label, you get anything with that label in there. Those things might also contain possible other labels.

It makes it so you have one module which fits in multiple areas rather than making multiple modules to fit into multiple areas. I'll probably have to draw out what labels comparing to folders is like.

This might help: http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=118708

[Saturn2888]

Wow I remember this thread. I think I should see what options there are. I think there could still be some good work done where some things are client-side and some are server-side, but the sidebar has the same name for both. What I like most is how eBox has changed from what it used to be like. The sidebar in 1.2.3, for instance, is much improved over vanilla 1.2 and especially over 1.0. Are there any questions the devs have for we users that would allow us to help make that trusty sidebar better to navigate?

I remember sitting down and trying to work something out and really couldn't come up with anything. The best I can say is fixing it up so there are two sections, client and server. One controls eBox as a server, the other controls eBox as a client. For instance, why have two areas that both say DNS? One is client, one is server. If they're both named the same, they shouldn't be in the same area, or it's really confusing as to which is which especially for a first-time user.

I'd really like to see a picture or make one myself that takes a look at different ways to portray the sidebar. I think the problem doesn't lie in there being a sidebar such that the sidebar isn't utilized as one. Here's another good tip, one I think could be implemented in seconds. I like to open things up in tabs and that proves problematic if the sidebar area I'm clicking on has multiple menus underneath it. When opening that up in a new tab, it just re-opens the dashboard. What I would suggest, to help people figure out what's in what area, even at first glance, is to have some kind of dot or triangle or >> to show that there are menu items underneath that sidebar option people probably won't ever know about until they click on it. That's simple yet effective in detailing what each sidebar option might be. "This has a >> on it. Must mean it has more options underneath meaning it's probably important".

[poundjd]

You know I think that maybe we should take one more step back from this and look at it again.
We have a few different types of services
     1) Services that your users directly interface with -> shares, e-mail, VoIP calls,...
     2) Services that your users indirectly interface with -> e-mail and other filters,....
     3) Services that your users may not even know about -> Firewalls, DHCP, DNS, Infrastructure setup,....

     Further each of these services have many configuration options that need to be addresses.  Also many of these functions have different configuration requirements for different aspects of the service, such as when the eBox is a client or when eBox is the server, or sometimes both.  For new administrators that can be quite confusing.
-jeff

[Saturn2888]

Yes, I agree with you poundjd. If eBox is really moving in the direction of multiple-eBox infrastructure, you'll wanna organize it in a way where the packages always have what you'd install.

Oh yeah, that's what I was going to note, there should be two sections, client and server rather than each grouping having its own.

Currently some services have their own client or server area (Network > DNS and then DNS), then there are some with both (VPN > Server or VPN > Client). It should be more specific to the service you wanna host. Instead of looking for VPN, you should look for what you wanna do. I want to setup a VPN server with DHCP and DNS right? Then it should be all one package you look at on the screen in the browser rather than a bunch of separate entities.

I would like to see some examples of this in action so we can kind of decide on (as users) what we prefer.

I made an example, but I don't know if this quite captures the idea I'm trying to get across: http://badmarkup.com/ebox/eBox-Interface-Mod-02.png.

I'm really showing off one screen here, but you should be able to click on the numbers and just change them. That tones down the amount of screens you need to go to or click on. Think about all your are seeing here. It's the dashboard, a way to edit network interfaces, VPN, anything just by a single click. You should be able to click on a hyperlink of the network name edit icon and edit all the options of that network including DNS, DHCP, VPN, and others. There needs to be another section for certs obviously. I would really like to see a way to make multiple certificate authorities so each VPN can use a different set of select certs. I wanna see what other people think of this first before I move on and do more examples.

I really think more screens need to be condensed. The interface as it is works, but it's slow and messy and leaves much to be desired. I would really like to have a more stream-lined interface which lets you manage a bunch of related features all on one screen rather than tons of different screens. When setting aliases for example, I'd rather edit a table of aliases so I might be able to copy/paste rather than editing each one individually. eBox should definitely not resemble the click-fest of SOHO routers.

Oo, even better! Manage and modify other eBoxes from your main eBox. I guess, because of business reasons, you could make this for local boxes only. It would be neat to have a way to see not only this machine's server/client networks, but also those of other eBoxes in the home network and modify those from this one screen.

[poundjd]

The last paragraph is really a product (service) that the company behind eBox is selling.  - So while I like the idea, they may not support development in that direction with out a dependency on the service. - they need to make money to stay open and continue the good work.

The main issue (as I see it) how are we going to organize all of this.  Once that is decided then the screens should just about make themselves apparent.
-jeff

[Saturn2888]

Yeah, I noticed that when I was writing it which is why I said "for business reasons". That's not such a big deal. Having an easy-to-use all-in-one screen, in my opinion, is better than 10 especially if you're on a slow connection. I'd rather load it once than load it every single time I change something and load the save page which may or may not be reliable depending on my connection.

Because of all the clicking, eBox feels really slow, and I wouldn't exactly call it a very fast web interface system. What did you think of my idea Jeff? There could be more underneath all those interfaces. I highly doubt eBox would normally have more than 8 connections for the majority of users.

[poundjd]

I agree that the amount of clicking needed to do just about anything is way too much, but finding the right idea to organize around is the first thing needed in my book.

Maybe, one approach is to base the organization around the IDEA of roles (that the server is supporting).  The most efficient method to organize the settings needed to configure a GATEWAY system is most likely quite different from the most efficient method to organize the settings needed to configure a FILE Server.
-jeff

[Saturn2888]

You know, you're right about that. Then roles are important. What are the roles? eBox says Infrastructure, Gateway, Office, and UTM.

[poundjd]

Well with the new Master and Slave arrangement I'd say that LDAP Master is one as well, and it has significant restrictions on what else can reside on the eBox system.
-jeff