wrap vs no-wrap on zuul console and log browsing
As I personally found the log browsing experience with Zuul painful, mainly to due weird rendering, I tried to address if with several changes.
Please watch this movie in order to understand the lack of wrapping issue, which is causing nausea/motion-sickness,
https://sbarnea.com/ss/Screen-Recording-2020-06-18-11-59-31.mp4
IMHO, text on web pages was created to wrap, presence of horizontal scrolling is, in most cases, a sign of bad implementation.
My attempt to address this and force wrapping was blocked at https://review.opendev.org/#/c/723603/ as few others Zuul core liked the current non-wrapping behavior (present in several places) and asked me to gather feedback from users regarding what would be good UX.
I will try to contact some UX communities as zuul-discuss mailing list is not very active. I am really curious what an UX-designer would have to say about that, maybe it would not be bad to have a couple of them to consult us in our UI decisions.
AFAIK, there is no other CI/CD that does not wrap console/log lines when browsing them (at least not on purpose).
Mainly we NEED feedback from *you* because without it nothing will happen. Please reply to this thread or better on the review.
Thanks Sorin Sbarnea
On Thu, 2020-06-18 at 12:26 +0100, Sorin Sbarnea wrote:
As I personally found the log browsing experience with Zuul painful, mainly to due weird rendering, I tried to address if with several changes.
Please watch this movie in order to understand the lack of wrapping issue, which is causing nausea/motion-sickness,
https://sbarnea.com/ss/Screen-Recording-2020-06-18-11-59-31.mp4
IMHO, text on web pages was created to wrap, presence of horizontal scrolling is, in most cases, a sign of bad implementation.
My attempt to address this and force wrapping was blocked at https://review.opendev.org/#/c/723603/ as few others Zuul core liked the current non-wrapping behavior (present in several places) and asked me to gather feedback from users regarding what would be good UX.
I will try to contact some UX communities as zuul-discuss mailing list is not very active. I am really curious what an UX-designer would have to say about that, maybe it would not be bad to have a couple of them to consult us in our UI decisions.
AFAIK, there is no other CI/CD that does not wrap console/log lines when browsing them (at least not on purpose).
Mainly we NEED feedback from *you* because without it nothing will happen. Please reply to this thread or better on the review.
I can imagine that I want both. Sometimes I want it wrap and sometimes unwrap.
So why not make it configurable on the page. But probably I would wrap it as default.
Kind regards,
Michiel Piscaer
I should have mentioned the configurability aspect. That is problematic as zuul does not have login support and use of cookies would require a EU-cookie popup, even if they would not be tracked server side.
Implementing it would require a non ignorable amount of effort, something I am unable to commit to.
Users can still use custom css extensions to alter default behavior, so some workarounds are available.
The big question here is: what should be the default behavior? (the one that seems to be preferred by most zuul users)
Hopefully we can identify a meaningful majority for one option or another and avoid a 50/50 split.
On 18 Jun 2020, at 12:44, Michiel Piscaer debian@masterpe.nl wrote:
On Thu, 2020-06-18 at 12:26 +0100, Sorin Sbarnea wrote:
As I personally found the log browsing experience with Zuul painful, mainly to due weird rendering, I tried to address if with several changes.
Please watch this movie in order to understand the lack of wrapping issue, which is causing nausea/motion-sickness,
https://sbarnea.com/ss/Screen-Recording-2020-06-18-11-59-31.mp4
IMHO, text on web pages was created to wrap, presence of horizontal scrolling is, in most cases, a sign of bad implementation.
My attempt to address this and force wrapping was blocked at https://review.opendev.org/#/c/723603/ as few others Zuul core liked the current non-wrapping behavior (present in several places) and asked me to gather feedback from users regarding what would be good UX.
I will try to contact some UX communities as zuul-discuss mailing list is not very active. I am really curious what an UX-designer would have to say about that, maybe it would not be bad to have a couple of them to consult us in our UI decisions.
AFAIK, there is no other CI/CD that does not wrap console/log lines when browsing them (at least not on purpose).
Mainly we NEED feedback from *you* because without it nothing will happen. Please reply to this thread or better on the review.
I can imagine that I want both. Sometimes I want it wrap and sometimes unwrap.
So why not make it configurable on the page. But probably I would wrap it as default.
Kind regards,
Michiel Piscaer
Zuul-discuss mailing list Zuul-discuss@lists.zuul-ci.org http://lists.zuul-ci.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/zuul-discuss
On 2020-06-18 13:22:57 +0100 (+0100), Sorin Sbarnea wrote: [...]
use of cookies would require a EU-cookie popup, even if they would not be tracked server side.
[...]
I personally consider this a misinterpretation of EU data protection regulations as they generally exempt cookies which are necessary components of an application and not used for the collection of personal information, tracking behaviors for marketing purposes, or sharing with outside parties. That aside, this should not be a concern for application developers, it's an operational choice which depends on local laws and organizational policy (just as they may need to make sure how they handle their Web server access logs isn't in violation of some privacy law in their jurisdiction).
We should probably still clearly document what cookies the WebUI stores, so that deployers can decide for themselves whether they need to notify their users about them in some way, but also just as much so that they can understand how the features related to that stored data work in case they need to troubleshoot them at some point.
The survey that run on https://www.reddit.com/r/userexperience/comments/hbcz7v/should_console_outpu... got 73% in favour of default wrapping instead of not wrapping.
Maybe we can get more votes on https://review.opendev.org/#/c/723603/ in order to see if there is a trend. Sadly I see very few bored to add gerrit votes, probably because they are not used to vote on changes made to projects where they are not core. Do we have a better process to gather feedback on this?
Is this enough in order to approve the change? I think it is "bit" more than the 51% we got with the brexit. Sadly surveys on reddit have a hardcoded timelimit and now is locked.
Implementing configurable options would count as scope creeping, especially as it also has privacy implications around cookies. I am not against that but I want to make it clear that it should not be the subject of this debate. /sorin
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 8:00 PM Jeremy Stanley fungi@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2020-06-18 13:22:57 +0100 (+0100), Sorin Sbarnea wrote: [...]
use of cookies would require a EU-cookie popup, even if they would not be tracked server side.
[...]
I personally consider this a misinterpretation of EU data protection regulations as they generally exempt cookies which are necessary components of an application and not used for the collection of personal information, tracking behaviors for marketing purposes, or sharing with outside parties. That aside, this should not be a concern for application developers, it's an operational choice which depends on local laws and organizational policy (just as they may need to make sure how they handle their Web server access logs isn't in violation of some privacy law in their jurisdiction).
We should probably still clearly document what cookies the WebUI stores, so that deployers can decide for themselves whether they need to notify their users about them in some way, but also just as much so that they can understand how the features related to that stored data work in case they need to troubleshoot them at some point. -- Jeremy Stanley _______________________________________________ Zuul-discuss mailing list Zuul-discuss@lists.zuul-ci.org http://lists.zuul-ci.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/zuul-discuss
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:57:27AM +0100, Sorin Sbarnea wrote:
Implementing configurable options would count as scope creeping,
It feels like we've had a couple of conversations come up (this, displaying script files) that are presented as ultimatums. Personally I hope this isn't a trend and reviews continue to think and comment more abstractly about changes, because I think this leads us to better solutions.
especially as it also has privacy implications around cookies.
I already have a "zuul_tz_string" cookie [1] if I change the timezone, so there is an extant reason to address this if we are concerned about it. Personally I agree with Jermey's general sentiment in [2]. However I also agree that there seems to be plenty of conservative opinion that "preference" cookies require acceptance too.
ISTM that the details of GDPR are so fuzzy with respect to who and what it applies to that Zuul-the-project could form no particular default opinion on what requires explicit consent and what doesn't; it's too specific to the circumstances of each actual deployment.
So I'd see the discussion probably more around what features can Zuul provide to make life as easy as possible for operators deploying under laws such as GDPR. Is that a list of cookies? Is it a configurable warning box for the UI? A statement that the project itself does not collect PII? I would suggest a spec that solicited opinions on this would be welcome and lead to actionable plans.
-i
[1] https://opendev.org/zuul/zuul/src/commit/cb5f4007a68280e3ab760d92e111a04333a... [2] http://lists.zuul-ci.org/pipermail/zuul-discuss/2020-June/001268.html
participants (4)
-
Ian Wienand
-
Jeremy Stanley
-
Michiel Piscaer
-
Sorin Sbarnea