[Toaster] [RFC] Image customisation detailed design

Ed Bartosh ed.bartosh at linux.intel.com
Thu Jul 9 04:25:54 PDT 2015 

Hi Belen,

Sorry for the late feedback.

Thank you for the nice and clear explanations and the video. It helped
me a lot to understand UI design of the image customization.
Despite my notices below I like the UI and overall concept. It
looks much cleaner than before. Thank you.

I decided to send my feedback to the mailing list as I don't have account
on Yocto wiki yet.

MICHAEL: I found it confusing that I entered a name and clicked create
but have not actually created anything
BELEN: mmm, this one is interesting. What makes you think that you have
not created anything?
ED: I agree with MICHAEL. This step doesn't create anything, but the
name. Can we make choosing base image as a mandatory step or merge it
with naming somehow?

ALEX: When configuring an image, I would suggest dropping the "Base
image recipe" concept, because we can't follow on updates from the base
image recipe after the custom recipe was created, and this will confuse
the user.
BELEN: and what do users do instead? Do they start they custom image
recipes from a blank slate? That will most likely result in an image
that doesn't build. Do you have an alternative starting point in mind?
ALEX: The users would start from an already existing image, as they do
now. What I'm suggesting is dropping the tab of possible base images,
and the ability to change the base image for a custom image once the
custom image recipe is created. This is the same point as below, just
pointing to the tab.
ED: This would make sense to do as we're not tracking relationship
between base and custom image after creation of custom image.
People may get a wrong idea of tracking changes of base image in
customized image if we keep showing base image name. It should be made
clear that we're using base image only for fetching list of packages
when we create custom image. Creation of custom image can be done
similar to custimizing file in editor using 'Save as'. Users have to
pick up base file and have to save it with the new name if they want
to make a customizable copy of it. After that relationship between
base file and custom one is lost. Can we do something similar?

MICHAEL: In general if you can avoid having data in a table that for
each one requires extra data looking up the tables will be much
faster/efficient. For example we have the dependencies button with total
size displayed. It should be really quick to count the number of
dependences, but much slower if we also have to retrieve the objects to
get the data in them, such as "name" and "size". If we can do that by
making it "on demand" that's much better, e.g. you click the button and
it fetches this extra data.
BELEN: this was my initial approach. From the UI perspective, it is also
tidier. Then Ed asked to see this information without having to click,
and I decided to give it a try to see how it would look like. I agree it
is better to present it when you select a certain dependency, so I will
revert to that. Sorry Ed :/
ED: I tend to disagree with this. Size of the components is very
important information when choosing base image. I agree that it should
not be shown in the table as it'd slow UI down. However, this
information is only shown when user presses the button with the number of
dependencies.

DAVID: How does this interface deal with "package groups"? People will
ask.
http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/1.8/dev-manual/dev-manual.html#usingpoky-extend-customimage-customtasks
BELEN: I'm afraid it doesn't. We know that at some point we'll need to
distinguish package groups from other recipes, and break them up, i.e.
allow people to remove packages from package groups. But during the high
level design discussions we came to the conclusion that it would be too
hard to do in version 1 - see page 11 of the initial design document
https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/images/3/31/Image_customisation_in_Toaster.pdf
ED: Looking at existing image recipes I see "IMAGE_FEATURES +=" lines almost
in all of them. This makes me think that most of the time images are
customized by adding feature/groups. I think David is right here -
people will definitely ask for this. It's just much more convenient,
faster and understandable to deal with well defined components than with
packages. For example IMAGE_FEATURES += "splash ssh-server-openssh hwcodecs
package-management" is quite straightforward and clear to me. It would
require user to pick up 4 groups from the list of groups with clear
names. However, it's much harder to say how many and which packages to
pick up to add this functionality to the image. I'm afraid without
introducing groups we'll make image customization different from how
it's done in real life and much harder that it should be.

Additional questions:

Adding / removing layers: Would it make sense to not allow users to
remove layers if custom images use recipes from them? Or at least
notify user which recipes from the layer are used in custom images?

There are a lot of variables available for tweaking
in image recipesi: SUMMARY, DESCRIPTION, IMAGE_FSTYPES, etc.
Are we going to allow changing them or allow editing recipes for custom
images?

Current set of image recipes uses single and multiple inheritance of
other image recipes. Are we going to show inheritance tree and allow
inheritance in custom recipes?

Regards,
Ed

On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 03:42:58PM +0000, Barros Pena, Belen wrote:
> I finally had a chance to work through your feedback for the image
> customisation design. I've grouped it into categories and replied to each
> of the comments. It is long, so I've transferred it to a wiki page
> 
> https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Design_feedback
> 
> Search in page for your names if you want to see the answers to the issues
> you raised. Edit the page if you want to reply to any of them, or reply
> here (whichever is easier for you).
> 
> There a few design ARs coming out of it all. The list is in
> 
> https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Design_feedback#Design_ARs
> 
> I will be working through those next week.
> 
> Thanks all for your design review!
> 
> Belén
>  
> 
> On 30/06/2015 13:58, "Barros Pena, Belen" <belen.barros.pena at intel.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >Thanks all for taking the time to look at the design and provide feedback!
> >
> >I need some time to digest your comments: hopefully we can discuss during
> >the Toaster meeting either this or next week.
> >
> >Cheers
> >
> >Belén
> >
> >On 26/06/2015 09:31, "Damian, Alexandru" <alexandru.damian at intel.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >>Thanks for putting all this together - very informative and very detailed
> >>mockups. This gave me a great opportunity to review and take in the
> >>interface over the last couple of days, and I thought
> >> quite a bit about how it works.
> >>
> >>
> >>I'm thinking this over from a bit of a different perspective - please
> >>bear with the consistent comments below. The way the interface is
> >>designed now is - select an image and modify it. This works
> >> beautifully if you're pretty sure about what's in a specified image, and
> >>how you want to modify it. The way I'm seeing it is a bit different - I
> >>want to see what would be installed to the image, and modify the list of
> >>packages that are there. The difference
> >> is a bit subtle, but it goes more on the discoverability/exploratory
> >>side, and less on - just add and remove a couple of packages that I know
> >>that are there.
> >>
> >>
> >>I have some comments of my own, and some replies to the comments below.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>1). I think it should be easy to build your own recipes in the
> >>Configuration page. The text entry with the build button should be no
> >>longer the primary means of starting a build, now that we can
> >> configure the build itself.
> >>
> >>
> >>I would suggest adding a "My image recipes" box in the style of "Most
> >>build recipes" in the Configuration, with two big buttons : "Build
> >>selected" and "New image recipe".
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>2). For a new user, it's not obvious how to start configuring the image
> >>contents, in the sense that "My image recipes" isn't the most obvious
> >>place one would start to configure a build, which
> >> is why people actually look for into Toaster.
> >>
> >>
> >>I would suggest making "Type the target you want to build" and Build
> >>button in a section similar to, and on top of the "Latest builds"
> >>section. And add, in that section, in the project page, a
> >> bit link "Configure the image contents".
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>3). Please drop the "New build" button. That button is a stop-gap measure
> >>to launching build commands, but now we're not simply issue-ing build
> >>commands, we are actually configuring the build.
> >> Even if you are an experienced user, it's opaque form - small and with
> >>very little information - makes it difficult to use.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>4). It seems a bit strange that I can navigate to most of the Project
> >>options via the left hand menu, but not to image recipes. The
> >>user-defined image recipes are Project-specific, and I think
> >> they are at the same level with the "Image recipes" and "Software
> >>recipes", but in the "CONFIGURATION" category.
> >>
> >>
> >>I don't think that having a duplicate link as a tab is a problem, but I
> >>get frustrated by the disappearance of the left-hand-menu in the My Image
> >>Recipes. BTW, thinking of the naming, I would
> >> suggest "Custom recipes", because it's not clear from the links that I
> >>can actually configure something there.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>5). When configuring an image, I would suggest dropping the "Base image
> >>recipe" concept, because we can't follow on updates from the base image
> >>recipe after the custom recipe was created, and
> >> this will confuse the user.
> >>
> >>
> >>Also, the tab with the Base image recipe in My Image details, allowing
> >>the user to change the base image for a recipe, should be taken out,
> >>since we cannot change the base image recipe after the
> >> initial selection.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>6). The "Add A Layer" panel on the right hand side, I would've expected
> >>it to be a pop-up like in the configuration page, not take me to the
> >>Compatible layers. It completely takes me out of the
> >> context of what I was doing - I want to customize a image for MinnowMax,
> >>I want to add minnowmax and be done, not go to a different page, and then
> >>have no idea how to return in a single click.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>7). I subscribe to David's view that the popups are annoying and
> >>unnecessary. I would suggest using box alerts as they are currently
> >>implemented, to avoid obscuring the screen, and divert user's
> >> attention. The feedback for immediate actions should not be in your
> >>face. Ditto for the "data loading" spinner, let's make it a bit more
> >>obscure. 
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>8). How do I know what's in my image in at a certain moment ? It would be
> >>great if I could have two tables in the image customization page - the
> >>current contents of the image, and the packages
> >> that are available. When selecting/removing a package (maybe we should
> >>change the terminology from Add/Delete?), a package would disappear from
> >>a list and appear in the second one. Also, when deleting / adding a layer
> >>in-page, the recipes available would just
> >> appear/disappear from the "available recipes" table.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>9). In the "My image recipe", I am not sure why the primary actions that
> >>you can take on the recipe (Build, Download, Delete) are tucked away in
> >>the right hand side, when my focus is on the left
> >> hand side, where I get drawn to the image name. Maybe we can move the
> >>buttons, make them bigger, as to be clear they are the primary action you
> >>do with a customized image ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Alex
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Reyna, David
> >><david.reyna at windriver.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>Hi Belén,
> >>
> >>I also appreciate the video and sample Toaster pages!
> >>
> >>Here are my comments, in addition to Michael's.
> >>
> >>1) Can we add a filter so that we can show just the packages that we can
> >>delete?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>​I suggested to have two tables - one with what's in the image, and one
> >>with what's available. I think this would cover the use case you have in
> >>mind.
> >>
> >>​
> >> 
> >>
> >>
> >>The use case is trimming the image, where we want the 100 packages that
> >>we wish to examine for removal not to be lost in the possible 1000's
> >>packages that are available to add.
> >>
> >>2) I will admit that I was thrown by the new status pop-up, because not
> >>only does it cover things up on my page, I also generally associate them
> >>with spam and ad-ware.
> >>
> >>I understand your use for showing an action in progress, but we already
> >>had a metaphor for that in the progress/status bars inserted (when
> >>applicable) at the top of the page. Why a new metaphor? What does it add
> >>that the regular model does not? I know that
> >> it does stay visible while you for example scroll, but is that a hard
> >>requirement?
> >>
> >>I also do not understand the dangling part, where I have to manual cancel
> >>it to make it go away. For example, I understand for example its use in
> >>the add layer parsing progress, but when it is done and says "Layer
> >>Information updated" why do I have to manually
> >> kill it? Could it at least go away on its own after a moment, and let
> >>that be the clue that the process completed?
> >>
> >>The "Undo" feature though is nice!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>​I'm not sure what the Undo feature is ? Can you give me a bit more
> >>details ?
> >>
> >>​
> >> 
> >>
> >>
> >>3) The new page can add layers in place which is nice, and I see how you
> >>can use it to parse and show that layer's package count. However, it
> >>appears that if I change my mind about the layer I have to go out to the
> >>layer page to remove it? Could perhaps the
> >> "undo" feature also be made available here? Or a layer delete icon?
> >>
> >>Speaking of layer parsing, don't we already have an idea of the package
> >>count per layer from the "all packages" table?
> >>
> >>4) How does this interface deal with "package groups"? People will ask.
> >>
> >>http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/1.8/dev-manual/dev-manual.html#usingpoky
> >>-
> >>extend-customimage-customtasks
> >>
> >>
> >>5) Concerns about package removal
> >>
> >>Adding packages is easy, but we (WR) have found that removing them is
> >>weirdly hard. I am very curious how the backend package removal/exclusion
> >>is being done, and who is doing it. In any case, we should have
> >>disclaimers in place.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>​This is a limitation of the way metadata is structured and tested. Th​e
> >>YP developers often miss correct dependency linking because the actual
> >>dependencies for a package (e.g.
> >> installed libraries) were already satisfied by another chain, so they
> >>miss specifying the dependency in the metadata.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>This problem will be re-occuring during Toaster use, and until we clean
> >>up the dependencies metadata, we need to tell the users exactly what's
> >>going on - and enable them to timely
> >> submit error reports about the invalid metadata. This is the only way we
> >>can actually clean everything up.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  * Some removed packages appear anyway in the image, because sometimes
> >>the dependency information in the packages are not complete nor correct.
> >>
> >>  * Some removed packages will break the build or the runtime, even
> >>though the dependencies say it should be ok. Users should be encouraged
> >>to test their changes early and often, and we may want to help save their
> >>bacon with checkpoints (based on the last successful
> >> build?) or multiple undo's so that they can back up to a working state
> >>rather than re-starting from scratch. Just saying.
> >>​​
> >>
> >>
> >>- David
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: toaster-bounces at yoctoproject.org [mailto:toaster-
> >>> bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Michael Wood
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 9:32 AM
> >>> To: toaster at yoctoproject.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [Toaster] [RFC] Image customisation detailed design
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the video Belén, Looks good.
> >>>
> >>> Couple of bits of feedback
> >>>
> >>> Creating an image recipe:
> >>>
> >>> I find the text in the modal too long, anything more than 2 sentences
> >>> and my attention span is over!
> >>>
> >>> I found it confusing that I entered a name and clicked create but have
> >>> not actually created anything, what about something like
> >>> suggestion1.png
> >>> (attached) this brings it more into line with import layer/create new
> >>> project/form based activity.
> >>>
> >>> Select a base image recipe:
> >>>
> >>> I was looking for a way to "de/re/select" an image, we don't quite have
> >>> the same concept here as the machines selection that I was expecting,
> >>> where you can always select regardless of whether it's already
> >>> selected.
> >>>
> >>> Add and delete packages:
> >>>
> >>> '.well' 1
> >>>
> >>> I was expecting the pencil to do the same as other pencils and activate
> >>> text input boxes. Obviously if you're on the Add/Delete packages page
> >>> you can't change the base image like that so maybe not having these
> >>> pencils would be better. I was also unsure as what the change
> >>> version/licence would do.
> >>>
> >>> '.well' 2
> >>>
> >>> If you've selected an image recipe and then remove the layer that
> >>> provides it... what happens?
> >>>
> >>> The Build Image recipe/ Download recipe file / Delete image recipe
> >>> buttons are somewhat easy to miss, they look a bit like progress
> >>> buttons
> >>> or other tabs. I wonder if they would be better off in '.well' 1. The
> >>> Build button could be more noticeable.
> >>>
> >>> In general if you can avoid having data in a table that for each one
> >>> requires extra data looking up the tables will be much
> >>> faster/efficient.
> >>> For example we have the dependencies button with total size displayed.
> >>> It should be really quick to count the number of dependences, but much
> >>> slower if we also have to retrieve the objects to get the data in them,
> >>> such as "name" and "size".  If we can do that by making it "on demand"
> >>> that's much better, e.g. you click the button and it fetches this extra
> >>> data.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Michael
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 12/06/15 14:40, Barros Pena, Belen wrote:
> >>> > As I mentioned in the Toaster weekly meeting last Wednesday, I've
> >>> recorded
> >>> > a (not so short, sorry) video showing a much more detailed design for
> >>> the
> >>> > image customisation feature. The video is here
> >>> >
> >>> > 
> >>https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/images/a/a1/Image-
> >><https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/images/a/a1/Image->
> >>> customisation.webm
> >>> >
> >>> > Everything that I show in the video is now available in the design
> >>> > prototype at
> >>> >
> >>> > https://yoctoproject.org/toaster
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Just in case you want to follow along ;)
> >>> >
> >>> > I think the design addresses pretty much all the feedback the Toaster
> >>> > contributors have provided so far (listed below). The only items not
> >>> > addressed are 1 (because it would require us to rethink Toaster as a
> >>> tool
> >>> > for absolute beginners and would impose a very specific workflow) and
> >>> 8
> >>> > (because I haven't had time to think about how we can do this, but we
> >>> can
> >>> > definitely come back to it).
> >>> >
> >>> > Please send any comments and new feedback to the mailing list so that
> >>> > Tiago can collect it and we can address it.
> >>> >
> >>> > This is the feedback we have received so far:
> >>> >
> >>> > 1. Should this kind of linear process be the main Toaster workflow,
> >>> > instead of the non-linear one currently provided by the existing
> >>> project
> >>> > page?
> >>> >
> >>> > 2. Size is project configuration dependent, so all size information
> >>> is a
> >>> > guess, an approximation. We should probably still show it, but the
> >>> > interface needs to present it as such (we need to make sure we don't
> >>> > present it as it was 100% accurate information). The same for
> >>> dependencies.
> >>> >
> >>> > 3. We need to create states for how the tables will look like when
> >>> certain
> >>> > information is missing (number of packages, sizes, etc)
> >>> >
> >>> > 4. We need to refine the recipe presentation in the workflow
> >>> >
> >>> > 5. We need to work on the way we present the actions. Do we really
> >>> need
> >>> > all the ones we have right now?
> >>> >
> >>> > 6. Replace the builds tab with a less prominent way of accessing
> >>> build
> >>> > information for the custom image recipe.
> >>> >
> >>> > 7. Provide a way to reenter the image customisation process from the
> >>> build
> >>> > results
> >>> >
> >>> > 8. Provide a way to 'select all' packages returned by a search
> >>> >
> >>> > 9. Do we need the reverse dependencies information in the packages
> >>> table?
> >>> >
> >>> > 10. Can we add the package size to the visible dependencies
> >>> information in
> >>> > the packages table?
> >>> >
> >>> > 11. The workflow is still too complex: too many concepts exposed
> >>> > (packages, layers, recipes). Should we just require people to build
> >>> the
> >>> > image they want to customise instead?
> >>> >
> >>> > Cheers
> >>> >
> >>> > Belén
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>toaster mailing list
> >>toaster at yoctoproject.org
> >>https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/toaster
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-- 
> >>Alex Damian
> >>Yocto Project
> >>
> >>SSG / OTC 
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >-- 
> >_______________________________________________
> >toaster mailing list
> >toaster at yoctoproject.org
> >https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/toaster
> 
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> toaster mailing list
> toaster at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/toaster

-- 
--
Regards,
Ed

More information about the toaster mailing list