Coda File System

Re: New work on Coda for Summer 2011

From: Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen_at_xemacs.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:05:25 +0900
Paulo Casanova writes:

 > >    2) How important is the desktop on the appliance?  Is the assumption
 > > that all it would be used for is just the coda utilities (clog, codacon,
 > > and so forth) or would a fully functional Linux VM be the better way
 > > to go with Gnome and all that it offers?   (A full Gnome installation
 > > would cause a much larger VM image similar to the test appliance listed
 > > above.)
 > 
 > Don't add a UI. Coda can't be controlled graphically

I doubt that this is true in principle, and there are some things
(realtime stats displays etc) that could make Coda more attractive to
potential users (in a "bright shiny things" sense), and would look
nice (and not be all that much extra trouble to add a GUI interface to).

But if that isn't done yet, this isn't the time to bother (unless you
have a volunteer who *wants* to implement it).

 > >    5) How important is having storage space available for the "user" in
 > > the appliance.  The proof of concept appliance has 300Megs of user storage
 > > available.  Is this too much or not enough?

I don't see why you'd need that much unless it includes venus's cache
space for the user.

 > >    6) Would people find it useful to have a choice of a small, no gnome
 > > appliance with limited user space (the goal is to have 500Megs or smaller
 > > total appliance) and a large, full gnome installation with 4G (or
 > > more)

I'm not a Windows person at all, so take this with a grain of salt.
My experience with Windows users is that indeed they do want GUIs, but
if it's not the Windows GUI, it's more pain than it's worth.  GNOME is
not what they want to see, and it's a pig.  It's easier to convince
them that they need to use the command line.

Perhaps an interesting idea would be an AJAX GUI that looks nice in
Anybrowser[tm].
Received on 2011-06-17 03:32:17