A UX question about requiring users to pass in --classic
adam.stokes at canonical.com
Fri Jan 27 18:57:40 UTC 2017
Thank you all, I filed a bug here:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:49 PM Sergio Schvezov <
sergio.schvezov at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 17:40:13 +0000, Adam Stokes wrote:
> > Since releasing the conjure-up snap I have gotten a few questions as to
> > we have to pass in --classic when the snapcraft.yaml defines the
> > confinement mode already.
> > I understand that this is similar to if a user was to snap install a snap
> > that was strictly devmode. We do want make the user aware of what they
> > installing and any possible caveats that go along with that. Forcing the
> > use of --classic and --devmode make sense in the overall picture,
> > cosmetically and user happiness (i guess?) this just seems like a _lot_
> > typing.
> > So I'm not arguing the use of --classic or --devmode but what if we take
> > another approach and treat both --classic and --devmode as a 'force/yes'
> > the apt world and provide a simple Y/n prompt asking the user if they are
> > sure they wish to install said snap because of it's current confinement
> > mode?
> > I much rather advertise running:
> > $ snap install conjure-up
> This *should* be what you advertise and I think snapd 2.22 solves that.
> > And the experience be:
> > Fetching info..checking confinement mode..
> > This is a classic snap, are you sure you wish to continue? [Y/n]
> > conjure-up installed
> > Thoughts?
> +1 (if on an interactive shell), if not it should fail with a nice message
> telling me this needs explicit concent as it is a classic confined snap.
> Sent using Dekko from my Ubuntu device
> Snapcraft mailing list
> Snapcraft at lists.snapcraft.io
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Snapcraft