Ubuntu server GUI

Sat Jun 28 00:20:46 UTC 2008

btw, i don't think satega and i have the same objectives, he's writing
an easy to use server packet i'm writing a management center for
experienced sysadmins, not only for easy of use and to catch new user,
what i want is to have a tool i can use on real world servers (which
doesn't have Graphical interface) so it need to run in CLI, but i'm
open to the idea of having a GTK/QT/Whatever frontend, but i think
this will make the sysadmins to clicky, so i don't think is a good
idea to start with a Graphical interface, that's why i prefer to use a
curses one.

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 7:15 PM, Nicolas Valcarcel
<nvalcarcel at ubuntu-pe.org> wrote:
> Well i was thinking on doing it using MVO model so it would be easy to
> add more GUI's, so if you want to do it i'm ok with that, also i'm
> more a backend man than a GUI one, so if you want to write the GUI and
> the i add the backend i will be happy with the idea so we can load
> balance an i can concentrate my efforts on writing the backend.
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Matthew D Barley <matt.barley at duke.edu> wrote:
>> I really like the idea. I am one of those individuals that you refer to
>> who are somewhat new to the Ubuntu/Linux environment and a GUI interface
>> on the server-end sounds like a fantastic idea.
>>>
>>> Ting
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 15:08 +0200, JAWUD wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just  my thoughts on ubuntu server GUI.
>>>>
>>>> English is not my native language so I apologize for grammar mistakes.
>>>>
>>>> Windows server system is very popular and I think it is because of the GUI it
>>>> has. In my opinion a user should be able to configure a server without the cli.
>>>> GUIs have some big advantage over the cli, it's easier to learn, more users are
>>>> comfortable with it and it just looks better. There is also a huge demand for a
>>>> good gui, see all the brainstorm ideas.
>>>> But a server without CLI is also not nice. A lot of Linux sysadmins are used to
>>>> it and some things are very hard to do with GUIs. So the perfect server os
>>>> should provide the user with a nice clean GUI but without disrupting the usual
>>>> cli.
>>>>
>>>> Building a GUI doesn't automatically mean that the problem is solved. Developing
>>>> a bad GUI isn't that difficult. The GUI needs a lot of usability testing. I also
>>>> believe that the GUI shouldn't be developed with the current situation in mind.
>>>> Systems like webmin provide a GUI for a lot of server software, but it isn't
>>>> easy.
>>>>
>>>> The target group of a GUI are people with less Linux experience and who wants a
>>>> stable and secure server. People who knows the cli are probable not interested
>>>> in the GUI. People with large deployments are also not interested in a GUI. They
>>>> want control over all the details.
>>>>
>>>> Server GUI options:
>>>>
>>>> There are several options for a GUI. First one is to run X/gnome and make a GUI
>>>> for the server. Remote server management can be done with VNC. This is the
>>>> windows way of server management. Running X/gnome takes a lot of resources and
>>>> VNC is not so fast.  So this is not a nice option.
>>>>
>>>> Another option is to run a web server and make a web interface. As far as I know
>>>> this is the current vision of the ubuntu server team (ebox). Running a web
>>>> server also takes some resources. Another disadvantage is that web interfaces
>>>> are not as nice and rich as QT/GTK apps. The real time graphs like system
>>>> monitor are not possible with html/css etc.
>>>>
>>>> The third option is to create a curses GUI. The advantages are that it doesn't
>>>> take a lot of resources, doesn't need some external services like a web server
>>>> and it is accessible via SSH. Some huge disadvantage is that it looks horrible.
>>>> How things looks are also important on the server.  Server admin are also humans
>>>> just like desktop users.
>>>>
>>>> The last option is to make a remote GUI system. Here's a example: a user
>>>> installs the "Ubuntu Server Console" program on his desktop. It's a GTK or QT
>>>> app which can be used to connect to a supported ubuntu server via ssh so it can
>>>> be configured. In my opinion this is the best option. It has a nice and rich GUI
>>>> and there is no web server or X/gnome. It's comparable with Rapache.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I can do a small usability test to figure out what people think of cli,
>>>> curses or remote gtk.  I can also create a ubuntuforum poll to get peoples
>>>> preference.
>>>>
>>>> All the interfaces are just different front ends. So I think ubuntu needs a
>>>> configuration abstraction layer. Something like Augeas. Augeas can become the
>>>> back end and then it's easier to build different GUIs. Augeas intend to cover
>>>> all commonly used configuration files and it is still possible to edit the
>>>> config files manual.
>>>>
>>>> Work together?
>>>> There are several people working on some gui option. Why not create one big
>>>> project, define some goals, create a roadmap and start working. These people
>>>> might be interested in working together..
>>>>
>>>> Nxvl – packaging augeas for ubuntu and want to build a cursus gui
>>>> Rapache – working on a remote apacke gui tool
>>>> Satega – working on ubuntu home server
>>>> Someone else??
>>>>
>>>> As far as I know all these people are on this mailing list. Together we can do
>>>> nice things and I'm interested in your opinion about this. Especially in
>>>> creating a "Ubuntu Server Console".
>>>>
>>>> - JAWUD
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kindest regards,
>>
>> Matthew
>> OIT Help Desk
>> Duke University
>> 684.2200
>>
>>
>> --
>> ubuntu-server mailing list
>> ubuntu-server at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
>> More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
>