#2217 closed defect (fixed)
Choose proper namings according to functionality inside I2Pconosle
Reported by: | anonymous maybe | Owned by: | zzz |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | minor | Milestone: | 0.9.35 |
Component: | apps/console | Version: | 0.9.34 |
Keywords: | Cc: | ||
Parent Tickets: | Sensitive: | no |
Description
there r some namings inside i2pconsole need to be changed or removed in order to make it clear for the user what is doing or talking about.
- inside http://127.0.0.1:7657/confignet section "IPv6 Configuration"
there is "Enable IPv6" , what does it mean exactly ???
we have disable IPv6 = good
we have Prefer IPv4 over IPv6 = good
we have Prefer IPv6 over IPv4 = good
we have Use IPv6 only (disable IPv4) = good
what in the world is Enable IPv6 for ??? if its standing for "use" then we have three options talking about the same thing = Prefer IPv4 over IPv6 & Prefer IPv6 over IPv4 & Use IPv6 only (disable IPv4).
so this is naming very confusing.
- http://127.0.0.1:7657/confignet section "TCP Configuration"
there is
Use auto-detected IP address
Always use auto-detected IP address
how is that helping to get any differences between these 2 options ??? if there is any differences in the functionality then one of them must be renamed or removed.
Subtickets
Change History (12)
comment:1 Changed 3 years ago by
comment:2 Changed 3 years ago by
As mentioned on IRC
<anonymousmaybe> thank you slumlord for the explanation but thats not useful inside i2pconsole <anonymousmaybe> users who will use i2p no body expect from them to come and ask here again what is this and that for <anonymousmaybe> ur explanations should be added to these choice when the mouse pointer click or move on them <anonymousmaybe> like when some option when u put the pointer on them it will show extra message explaining what is it talking about <anonymousmaybe> so its either an extra explanation added when u point on the option or rename the entire option or merge it into another option
I can understand if English isn't your first language, to me, these options make sense.
if we are not firewalled , Not firewalled ?? not sure its about English problem but its about how much technical informative is that ?
i dont c any reason why these texts shouldnt be rephrased to more suitable terminologies which give the direct technical explanation behind it.
comment:3 Changed 3 years ago by
Component: | api/naming → apps/console |
---|---|
Owner: | set to str4d |
@OP please propose some specific changes/rephrasing that you would be happy with.
comment:4 Changed 3 years ago by
@OP please propose some specific changes/rephrasing that you would be happy with.
to be honest with u zzz i c that they r extra not needed options and the naming should be as following:
- inside http://127.0.0.1:7657/confignet section "IPv6 Configuration"
(also merge IPv6 + IPv4 Firewalled by Carrier-grade NAT or DS-Lite settings)
- Prefer IPv4 over IPv6
- Prefer IPv6 over IPv4
- Use IPv4 only (disable IPv6)
- Use IPv6 only (disable IPv4)
- Disable IPv4 inbound (Firewalled by Carrier-grade NAT or DS-Lite)
- Disable IPv6 inbound (Firewalled by Carrier-grade NAT or DS-Lite)
and the section name to that would be like "IP version Configuration" or "IPv4 & IPv6 configurations" any doesnt matter since the choices r clear below the section name.
and inside http://127.0.0.1:7657/confignet section "TCP Configuration"
Auto-detected IP address (currently XXXXXXX)
use only this one which i think its enough to do both functionality. user firewalled or not its gonna detect that and work accordingly.
i would add a suggestion if we also can merge "UDP Configuration" with "Externally reachable TCP port" since the whole idea of them r talking about ports configurations to be like this one:
- UDP port: XXXX
- TCP port: XXXX
- Use UDP port number same as in TCP port nummber. (Default)
- Completely disable UDP port (select only if behind a firewall that blocks outbound UDP)
- Note: you can adjust ports numbers according to your needs.
also for Use UDP ..etc choice above, make it as square with tick mark instead of circle with dote inside it. and by that this option will disabled if the user will choose "Laptop Mode" which will change both TCP and UDP randomly according to ticket #2216.
Section name would be : "Configure Ports" or "Configure TCP & UDP Ports"
this is really useful for new and even old users to make things more clear. i hope that my suggestions would suits ur implementations. ofcourse maybe more useful modifications need to be added to the list but thats what i c useful to add at the moment.
Thank You
comment:5 Changed 3 years ago by
Thanks OP for your suggestions.
In the future, would you please use standard English in trac tickets for maximum readability and understanding. Abbreviations such as "r", "ur", "c" make the conversation much more difficult than it needs to be. Thanks again.
comment:6 Changed 3 years ago by
Milestone: | undecided → 0.9.35 |
---|---|
Owner: | changed from str4d to zzz |
Status: | new → accepted |
I reduced the number of sections, converted several sections to subsections, and rearranged some of the sections and options, for clarity and consistency. For example, I put the UDP port and TCP port subsections next to each other.
In d4955e66ce64fb45990b99aba43394014372ffae 0.9.34-13. Let me know if it's an improvement.
I didn't rename or combine things as suggested by OP, but some changes may be possible. Ultimately, though, the UI options must still correspond with the underlying implementation. There's several orthogonal parts - IPv4/v6, TCP/UDP, and host/port - and various ways to attempt to combine the options for each. Every option on the form now is a result of some request or problem in past years, where the user needed a way to configure things for his network.
So currently I don't see many opportunities to reduce the number of options or combine things. While the page is complex, most users will never need to look at or change anything on it, and there's a note at the top of the page that says exactly that.
Leaving ticket open for testing and possible further changes.
comment:7 Changed 3 years ago by
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | accepted → closed |
hearing no objection, closing.
comment:8 Changed 3 years ago by
Resolution: | fixed |
---|---|
Status: | closed → reopened |
comment:9 Changed 3 years ago by
i just want to reopen this ticket because that the main issue of ipv6 confusion hasn't solved yet, or i see no reason why not to solve it.
comment:10 follow-up: 11 Changed 3 years ago by
Status: | reopened → infoneeded |
---|
The reasons are as stated in comment 6 above. Do you consider the changes made so far an improvement? What further changes do you suggest?
comment:11 Changed 3 years ago by
Status: | infoneeded → open |
---|
Replying to zzz:
The reasons are as stated in comment 6 above. Do you consider the changes made so far an improvement? What further changes do you suggest?
since you said "So currently I don't see many opportunities to reduce the number of options or combine things".
so no reason to keep this ticket open. because even if i will provide further options it will as well go through the same statement/reason you mentioned above which also cant be added.
closing ticket
comment:12 Changed 3 years ago by
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | open → closed |
As mentioned on IRC
You seem to have ignored the last few words for the 2 options you mention in the
TCP Configuration
I can understand if English isn't your first language, to me, these options make sense.