Usability discussion

[kopchik]

(Sorry for the long message. Please do not consider it as smth offensive, just I'm trying to figure out if it is possible to make netctl even more convenient in everyday active usage)

Please consider the following scenarios and related usability questions.

1. We need to connect to an open network. Each time we do this we need to create a profile. This is quite inconvenient if we have dozens of open networks (like in airports, railway station) and we do not know which one is really open and which one tries to suck money from the credit card at a high rate (say 5euro/hour). Besides that, there is no much sense to create so many profiles that differ only by one parameter -- ESSID. I think the connection to open networks could be simplified.

2. If a profile fails there is no indication of the problem. So each time I have to look at journalctl -f . Why not just print the information to the terminal?

3. It fails often and it doesn't try to reconnect. If I use netctl-auto@wlan0 I often have to do "systemctl restart netctl-auto@wlan0". I think we need auto-reconnection in such cases.

4. Why it checks if the interface is up before doing a connection? Usually I need to see the list of networks before creating a profile. So each time I have to do "ifconfig wlan0 up; iwlist scna| less". Then I make a profile, attempts to connect... It fails, I go to system logs and... oh, right, the interface is up so it doesn't want to connect. Then I have to put interface down and repeat the connection attempt. If netctl is the only connection management software there is no point of that extra checks. As a user I would like to see connections "just working" without asking extra questions and extra configuration.

[joukewitteveen]

ad 1: I agree that this is not ideal. Workarounds may be possible (let the profile read its ESSID from some volatile source, link a profile to a user owned file, or otherwise), but a solid solution will be welcomed.

ad 2: We mimic systemctl in this.

ad 3: File bug reports and write patches.

ad 4: This is a question of hygiene: netctl requires the user to have it. Have you tried wifi-menu?

[kopchik]

1. Ok, this one can be solved with wifi-menu.

2. Please don't mimic bad behavior. For a user this behavior is much less convenient. Let's be user-friendly.

3. Ok, I'll do this.

4. Why this is considered as a "hygiene"? Running interfaces are "dirty" and down interfaces are "clean"?