Bug#484121: tasksel: let's sync on the GNOME task

[Sam Morris]

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 10:04:06 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 03:48:32AM -0400, Eric Dorland
> <eric at kuroneko.ca> wrote:
>> * Mike Hommey (mh at glandium.org) wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 03:25:08AM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
>> > > * Joey Hess (joeyh at debian.org) wrote:
>> > > > Eric Dorland wrote:
>> > > > > Well I think Google generally does treat the Iceweasel user
>> > > > > agent properly.
>> > > > 
>> > > > Not in the case of maps.google.com, where the sidebar cannot be
>> > > > hidden in iceweasel, can in firefox.
>> > > > 
>> > > > > > I'm afraid that documenting it in README.Debian won't help
>> > > > > > desktop users who just find that this strange "iceweasel"
>> > > > > > browser we install by default doesn't work on sites that
>> > > > > > firefox works on.
>> > > > > 
>> > > > > Could we do it in a more prominent perhaps?
>> > > > 
>> > > > FWIW, I got from the README.Debian to #354622, but I was unable
>> > > > to from there figure out how to quickly and easily change the
>> > > > user agent.
>> > > > 
>> > > > A more prominent thing might be a hyperlink directly to the
>> > > > relevant about:config setting from the default start page .. or a
>> > > > pre-installed user agent switcher that has firefox in it as an
>> > > > option. I think that something like that would go a certian
>> > > > distance to making it accessible to users, though it would still
>> > > > be a bother.
>> > > 
>> > > I thought about this this week and I've come to agree with Joey's
>> > > position.
>> > > 
>> > > We could document exactly how to change the useragent for the user,
>> > > but why wouldn't they do this? From there perspective there are all
>> > > upsides and no downsides to making the useragent be Firefox, And if
>> > > everyone is going to mechanically change it (or want to change it),
>> > > then it's not really a good default.
>> > > 
>> > > While I agree that websites shouldn't be abusing useragent strings
>> > > the way they do, we can't win this fight on our own and in the mean
>> > > time our users are getting broken results that are in our power to
>> > > fix.
>> > > 
>> > > Thoughts?
>> > 
>> > We have plenty other browsers that are not Firefox and don't try to
>> > claim to be Firefox...
>> 
>> In the case of Iceweasel it is in fact 99.9% Firefox, so claiming it's
>> Firefox isn't much of a stretch.
> 
> In the case of kazehakase, galeon and epiphany, rendering-wise, it is
> also 99.9% Firefox. Do you suggest they replace their user-agent, too?

If they want to not frustrate their users by presenting them with broken 
web sites, then yes they should.

>> As much as we would like it not to be so, even people who should know
>> better are not handling non-Firefox useragent strings correctly. We can
>> present the user with documentation on how to change the useragent
>> string, but why wouldn't they change it? There's no downside from there
>> perspective, sites just work better. If the user should always set this
>> themselves, then it should be the default.
> 
> The fact is users don't *always* have to set this, because far from all
> websites require it. If so many users were impacted, we would be drowned
> under piles of bug reports about this issue, yet, there is only a few of
> them (only one, iirc). With concerning issues, we usually get much more,
> especially when they are longstanding issues.

I expect many of the same kinds of users who don't know how to change 
their user agent also don't know how to report bugs. Or maybe they 
haven't bothered because they know what the response will be... I am in 
that category. :)
 
> Mike

-- 
Sam Morris
http://robots.org.uk/
 
PGP key id 1024D/5EA01078
3412 EA18 1277 354B 991B  C869 B219 7FDB 5EA0 1078