Separation of Virtualisation / NAS Issues in Support Forum

[BRiT]

 

* While I like the terminology change to call them Apps, there MUST MUST MUST be the word 'container' clearly noted, in very obvious places.  Most users are going to be looking for 'container support' and nothing else!  'Container' HAS to be at least as prominent as 'App'.

 

Have to disagree here.  Most users (especially new ones) have no idea what a container is, but know exactly what an app is (nor do they care what the delivery method is)

And I could be wrong.  But we're talking here about users seeking support for their app/container?  How would they have gotten this far without having had to read a fair bit about Dockers and containers?  They should be 'inDOCtrinated' by now, more likely to say 'container' than 'app'.

 

They simply install Community Apps plugin and then search for the app and install it. They wouldnt need to know if its docker, plugin, or vm. This is the best experience for the users, not needing to know the technical details.

[Squid]

 

* While I like the terminology change to call them Apps, there MUST MUST MUST be the word 'container' clearly noted, in very obvious places.  Most users are going to be looking for 'container support' and nothing else!  'Container' HAS to be at least as prominent as 'App'.

 

Have to disagree here.  Most users (especially new ones) have no idea what a container is, but know exactly what an app is (nor do they care what the delivery method is)

And I could be wrong.  But we're talking here about users seeking support for their app/container?  How would they have gotten this far without having had to read a fair bit about Dockers and containers?  They should be 'inDOCtrinated' by now, more likely to say 'container' than 'app'.

 

They simply install Community Apps plugin and then search for the app and install it. They wouldnt need to know if its docker, plugin, or vm. This is the best experience for the users, not needing to know the technical details.

Even without CA attempting to blur the distinction between a plugin and a container, when push comes to shove they are all the exact same with just a different delivery method.  And 6.2 is going to be introducing (apparently) default volume mappings so that the tech details associated with a container are further hidden, and the entire system becomes closer to a one click install

[itimpi]

I think that probably the most important change in the short term is to simply rename the KVM Hypervisor forum to something more like Virtualisation/VM's as the current name gives no clue to those who do not know what KVM or Hypervisor mean.  That might mean that more of the VM related questions end up in that section. 

 

The Docker Engine is probably better renamed as Docker Apps.  I do not see that the "Engine" word has much meaning to most people.

 

If possible I would also simply reorder the v6 Support area and  move the General Support sub-forum to be the last in the area so that at least people have to consciously skip over the others first.

 

I would think these changes could be made without the need to consider moving any threads around?  In theory they should be purely cosmetic in nature - but it would be interesting to see if they have any impact on where questions get asked.

[jonp]

Just wanted to chime in on this thread and endorse this effort.  It's always a challenge to reorganize the forum into more logical and meaningful ways and I applaud this effort and the thorough discussion around it.  Please continue and I will check back in on this thread after we release 6.2 to throw my thoughts into the mix.

 

One thing I definitely agree with is we need to rename the "KVM Hypervisor" forum to something else.  I also think we need to design the forum to be less technical in nature from a labels/organization standpoint.  Apps is a far better term to use than Containers.  Not sure if we can get away with that with VMs, but I think more people know what a virtual machine is than a container.  That said, please keep in mind that changes like these tend to have a domino effect when it comes to the amount of work it will take to support them (think about areas of our website, blog posts, documentation in the wiki, etc.) that will have to change in order for the forum to make sense as well.  This isn't a small endeavor, so please be considerate of what you ask us to do given the additional work that will surround it.  Time we spend working on the forums, website, wiki, etc. is all fine and good, but it's time we're NOT spending adding features and putting out new releases.

[limetech]

dlandon, RobJ, and others: Thank you for putting this info together.  We are ready to release both 6.2.1 "stable", and 6.3.0-rc1 "next".  But we are going to make life easier by changing up the forum a little bit.  Here's what we're planning on doing, but open to suggested changes 

 

First, under the "Support (unRAID 6 Only)" category we will rename "General Supprt (V6)" to "unRAID OS 6.0/6.1 (EOS)" and then create a couple new boards, and move some boards from "Development" category (and git rid of it).

 

"Support (unRAID 6 only)" will then appear like this:

 

  unRAID OS 6.3 (next)

  unRAID OS 6.2 (stable)

  unRAID OS 6.0/6.1 (EOS)

  Docker Engine

  KVM Hypervisor

  Plugins

  Security

  Feature Requests

 

(The "Programming" board will get moved into the "Company" category.)

 

We will then move this monster thread into "unRAID OS 6.2 (stable)".  The idea is that we can break out certain posts from this thread into separate topics such as "Upgrade Instructions", "Network Issues", "VM Issues", etc.  We can sticky these posts.  Next, we will encourage the Community to post defect reports found in 6.2 directly in this board.  Eventually we will move existing Defect board topics into here (or where appropriate) and then deprecate the board.

 

We will do the same thing with "unRAID OS 6.3 (next)" board.  We will post the announcement in here with instructions on how to install "next" (aka, "mainline") release.  Similarly, defect reports related to 6.3.x should be placed in here.

 

When 6.3 goes "stable", at that time:

- we change "unRAID OS 6.2 (stable)" to "unRAID OS 6.2 (EOS)"

- we change "unRAID OS 6.3 (next)" to "unRAID OS 6.3 (stable)"

When we're ready to release first -rc of 6.4, at that time:

- we create "unRAID OS 6.4 (next)" board

 

We will still post Announcements of new releases, but these will be non-reply.

 

[RobJ]

dlandon, RobJ, and others: Thank you for putting this info together.  We are ready to release both 6.2.1 "stable", and 6.3.0-rc1 "next".  But we are going to make life easier by changing up the forum a little bit.  Here's what we're planning on doing, but open to suggested changes 

 

First, under the "Support (unRAID 6 Only)" category we will rename "General Supprt (V6)" to "unRAID OS 6.0/6.1 (EOS)" and then create a couple new boards, and move some boards from "Development" category (and git rid of it).

 

"Support (unRAID 6 only)" will then appear like this:

 

  unRAID OS 6.3 (next)

  unRAID OS 6.2 (stable)

  unRAID OS 6.0/6.1 (EOS)

  Docker Engine

  KVM Hypervisor

  Plugins

  Security

  Feature Requests

 

(The "Programming" board will get moved into the "Company" category.)

 

We will then move this monster thread into "unRAID OS 6.2 (stable)".  The idea is that we can break out certain posts from this thread into separate topics such as "Upgrade Instructions", "Network Issues", "VM Issues", etc.  We can sticky these posts.  Next, we will encourage the Community to post defect reports found in 6.2 directly in this board.  Eventually we will move existing Defect board topics into here (or where appropriate) and then deprecate the board.

 

We will do the same thing with "unRAID OS 6.3 (next)" board.  We will post the announcement in here with instructions on how to install "next" (aka, "mainline") release.  Similarly, defect reports related to 6.3.x should be placed in here.

 

When 6.3 goes "stable", at that time:

- we change "unRAID OS 6.2 (stable)" to "unRAID OS 6.2 (EOS)"

- we change "unRAID OS 6.3 (next)" to "unRAID OS 6.3 (stable)"

When we're ready to release first -rc of 6.4, at that time:

- we create "unRAID OS 6.4 (next)" board

 

We will still post Announcements of new releases, but these will be non-reply.

 

Would this be a good time to make a few other minor changes, basically renames and board description changes?  We discussed this here and beyond -

  http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=47046.msg450234#msg450234

 

In particular, I'd like to see the KVM and Docker engine boards renamed, the container board promoted from child, and the descriptions improved, to decrease user confusion.

 

But perhaps further discussion should go in that thread...

[limetech]

Would this be a good time to make a few other minor changes, basically renames and board description changes?  We discussed this here and beyond -

  http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=47046.msg450234#msg450234

 

In particular, I'd like to see the KVM and Docker engine boards renamed, the container board promoted from child, and the descriptions improved, to decrease user confusion.

 

But perhaps further discussion should go in that thread...

 

I've read through the thread and there a lot good ideas in there.  Here is my perspective on the subject as of this date:

 

a) As mentioned elsewhere, we are going to be moving to the IPS platform:

https://invisionpower.com/features/apps/

 

We have had a side-project with IPS working on a migration tool and it's probably 95% done.  I'm bringing this up not to talk about the merits of IPS vs other forum platforms, but rather to point out that I don't want to undertake a large topic re-arrangement task until after moving to IPS.

 

b) That said, I have no problem with rearranging/renaming specific existing boards (just not crazy about moving topics between boards, though some of that may happen).

 

c) My main concern, and the reason we are bringing this up now, is this: I need a version-specific board where all support topics for that release can be gathered.  For example, upon release of 6.2, if we had this board, instead of the 6.2 announcement post being the "catch all" for everything 6.2-related, we could  have had separate topics for each issue or bug or improvement or upgrade question.

 

The current situation is that for someone upgrading to 6.2, or running 6.2, if there is an issue, where do they post?  Their choices currently are:

- reply in the Announcement topic

- create a post in the General Support (V6) board

- create a post in the Defect board

or depending on what the problem/question is, could be any of a number of other board, eg:

- KVM Hypervisor

- Docker Engine

- Plugins

etc

 

Generally I want to have people post first in the version-specific board.  Depending on the nature of the question/problem, we or a mod can move the post to appropriate board.

 

Here's what I've come up with then:

(These two categories replace "Support (unRAID 6 Only)" and "Development (unRAID 6 Only) categories".)

 

unRAID OS Support

  Version 6.3 (next)

  Version 6.2 (stable)

  Version 6.0/6.1 (EOS)

  Security

  Feature Requests

  Defect Reports (Deprecated)

  Programming

 

Application Support

  Docker Engine

  Docker Containers

  VM Engine (KVM)

  VM Templates

  Plugins (V6)

 

I want to get rid of the "Defect Reports" board - instead defect reports should be posted in the version-specific board.

 

Notice there is no "General Support" board - my question to those reading this: do we still need this catch-all board?

[CHBMB]

Whilst you're taking the opportunity to have a think about these things, I was wondering if a "Noob" board would be a good idea? 

 

Personally I think there still is a role for a general forum, as a central repository for, well, "general queries" that aren't version specific...

[RobJ]

...

Generally I want to have people post first in the version-specific board.  Depending on the nature of the question/problem, we or a mod can move the post to appropriate board.

 

Here's what I've come up with then:

(These two categories replace "Support (unRAID 6 Only)" and "Development (unRAID 6 Only) categories".)

 

unRAID OS Support

  Version 6.3 (next)

  Version 6.2 (stable)

  Version 6.0/6.1 (EOS)

  Security

  Feature Requests

  Defect Reports (Deprecated)

  Programming

 

Application Support

  Docker Engine

  Docker Containers

  VM Engine (KVM)

  VM Templates

  Plugins (V6)

 

Agreed, all good (although I prefer 'Docker Containers', then 'Other Docker Support').  What will be important is good clear descriptions, that un-confuse the unsure or newbie user.  I'd make the descriptions as lengthy as you can get away with.

 

I want to get rid of the "Defect Reports" board - instead defect reports should be posted in the version-specific board.

My concern with this is that the current Defects board keeps them all together, and easily manageable.  If you allow them within a support board, they will quickly disappear into past pages.  How about version-specific defects boards?

 

Notice there is no "General Support" board - my question to those reading this: do we still need this catch-all board?

I've always liked having a catch-all board, just because it does accommodate new or confused users, but it does mean more thread moving.  I think it's clear that if you have one, it will be used.  So if you don't want one, the descriptions will have to be very clear, and then perhaps one board with a bit of ambiguity in the description, for a user with a non-specific question or who just can't decide.

 

The 6.0/6.1 description should include a final note that "If you have an older version, please post in 'General Support for v5 and older'".  (Sadly that's still a semi-active board.)

[CHBMB]

I like the idea of version specific defect boards.  Any way of enforcing a template format within it?

[limetech]

For now I'm not going to create separate release-specific boards.  Instead, hopefully people will make is clear what version they are running.

 

What should we do with the Pluigins child boards?

[Squid]

What should we do with the Pluigins child boards?

Move the 6.0 board to the legacy section.

 

Rename the 6.1 board to be something like 6.1 Plugin Specific Support Threads....

 

[limetech]

What should we do with the Pluigins child boards?

Move the 6.0 board to the legacy section.

 

Rename the 6.1 board to be something like 6.1 Plugin Specific Support Threads....

Ok...

[BRiT]

Whilst you're taking the opportunity to have a think about these things, I was wondering if a "Noob" board would be a good idea? 

 

Personally I think there still is a role for a general forum, as a central repository for, well, "general queries" that aren't version specific...

 

I would create a new Forum called "Presales Support" where all potential purchasers questions would be asked. That is entirely missing in the current structure. This will enable LimeTech to have an area to focus on in order to close the deal to bring in more revenue.

[limetech]

I would create a new Forum called "Presales Support" where all potential purchasers questions would be asked. That is entirely missing in the current structure. This will enable LimeTech to have an area to focus on in order to close the deal to bring in more revenue.

 

Good idea.  Renamed the "LimeTech Prdducts" board in Company category to "LimeTech Pre-Sales Support".

[CHBMB]

I still think there's mileage in after sales but new to Unraid posts.

 

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

 

 

[limetech]

I still think there's mileage in after sales but new to Unraid posts.

 

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

Isn't that the entire forum? or maybe the Lounge?