Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <3D0F6A1E.3000702@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 13:13:02 -0400
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Garrett Serack <gserack AT experientia DOT org>
CC: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Lousy setup program defeats users with disabilites.
References: <3D0F44E2 DOT 8080304 AT experientia DOT org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Garrett Serack wrote:

> I just recently downloaded the most recent version of this 
> discriminating peice of software,


Yes, we hate people with disabilities and deliberately tried to make 
things harder for them.  Sheesh.

The core classes necessary for *command-line* operation of setup.exe are 
already there.  The problem is, nobody has USED those classes to 
implement all of the required options/flags/switches to completely 
duplicate the functionality of the GUI.  But we will get there.

Right now, the setup developers are desperately trying to fix setup so 
that it doesn't crash/hang/go-boom on certain platforms.  (Again, this 
error is because we have determined that people with disabilities 
disproportionately use those platforms, so we deliberately broke it on 
those.  We know that this might inconvenience non-differently-abled 
users as well as differently-abled ones -- but you just can't make an 
omelette without breaking a few eggs.)

Okay, even *I* am tired of my own sarcasm now.  I promise to stop being 
sarcastic, if you'll promise to take the chip off your shoulder, Garrett.


> Some of the column headers are unreadable, and require the user to 
> resize them in order to read what they say.


This is a new bug...are you using really large fonts?


> I find the use of this setup program deplorable. Not only does it cleary 
> disciminate against users with disabilities, it tends to speak volumes 
> about the state of Open source software.


Chip, shoulder...


> I keep checking to see if these deficiencies are ever addressed, but 
> every time I check, the damn installer gets harder and harder to use.


In one respect, yes: the "chooser" pane is now the same size as all the 
other panes -- previously it was bigger.  This makes it harder to see 
all the information.  However, this was a necessary step toward making 
ALL of the panes resizable...which is good for everybody.  (We're in the 
one-step-backward phase before the two-steps forward)

You're not the only person who wants this.


> In the past, the default was to install everything, much to the 
> irritation of many users. Now the default is to install only a basic 
> core of packages. At the moment, there is no easy way to get everything. 
> In the current version of Cygwin Setup, if you want everything, you must 
> do the following:
> 
>   1. When the Cygwin Setup says "Select packages to install", click on
>      the "View" button until it says "Full".
>   2. Wherever it says "Skip", click twice until it gives the version
>      number of the package. That means it will be downloaded and
>      installed.


Thanks for not quoting the last line of that FAQ:
"This should become much easier in a future version of Cygwin Setup."
Deceptive, much?


> Gee, I like to click twice for every single package. Makes me *soooooo* 
> happy.


Yes, we did it just to please you. </oops, sorry, sarcasm slipped out>


> Now, granted if you read enough dribble 


Patches to the webpage gratefully accepted.  If you consider the current 
text dribble, please send in better text.

> on the Cygwin.com homepage , 
> you'll find the sentance:
> 
> For instance, clicking on the "All" category will provide you with the 
> opportunity to install every Cygwin package.
> 
> Which when I tried clicking on "all", simply opened and closed the tree. 
> Turns out that you need to click on the goofy icon (which is a VERY 
> small target) or the word beside it. In this case "Default". Hardly 
> clicking on "All".  Now, the large pause between clicking on it when it 
> is set to "Default" makes me think that I missed the click, therefore I 
> need to click again. It then SKIPS over "Install", settling on 
> "Reinstall". Clicking once more quickly sets it all to "Uninstall", and 
> once more sets it quickly to "Default".  Funny, without trying for many 
> minutes, I never found the "Install" option.


Unfortunately, setup.exe is a fast moving target.  The documentation 
lags.  Sorry about that.  We'll try to slow down development on 
setup.exe so that the documentation can catch up.  </darn, there I went 
again with the sarcasm...>


> All in all, this installer, while beatifully allowing users to 
> individually select packages to conserve download space (a VERY laudable 
> goal, as space and speed are limited for many) it fails to deliver that 
> feature for those who have limited physical functionality.
> 
> Now, I realize that this has been quite a rant.  I work with people who 
> have limited abilities with their hands, but can often be quite 
> brilliant otherwise.  I encourage them to work problems out for 
> themselves, and I hate to see these types of things causing them to give 
> up on Open source tools due to the hurdles involved.
> 
> On a tangental note, software that fails to meet the needs of disabled 
> people can be disallowed from working in some government institutions, 
> by law. Again, the last thing the Open source community needs, is to be 
> ripped from some of the very people it needs to help the most.


Not entirely true.  First, you're talking about the Americans with 
Disabilities Act, which (obviously) only applies in the US.  Second, 
government software *VENDORS* (defined as those who provide software to 
the US government in exchange for $$$) are prohibited from bidding on 
contracts to provide software, unless they insure that the software they 
will provide is ADA-friendly.

This doesn't apply to free (gratis) software like cygwin -- unless Red 
Hat wanted to sell it to the government for $$$ under a contract.  Which 
is not to say that we shouldn't do a better job at accommodating 
disabled users.  We should.  But don't use FUD to advance your point.

--Chuck


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/