Documentation for gnome-control-center does not mention PolicyKit

[Dylan McCall]

The Network Administration and Users Administration tools both have had significant changes in user interface due to the use of PolicyKit. However, their documentation does not mention the need to Unlock the capplet to make changes. In addition, the screenshots for these capplets are out of date and do not include the Unlock button.

[Jim Campbell (jwcampbell)]

Thanks for filing this bug report, Dylan. This will need to be fixed for
both Ubuntu, Xubuntu, and (most likely) Edubuntu docs. I'm not sure how it
would apply to Kubuntu docs.

On 3/11/08, Dylan McCall <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Public bug reported:
>
> The Network Administration and Users Administration tools both have had
> significant changes in user interface due to the use of PolicyKit.
> However, their documentation does not mention the need to Unlock the
> capplet to make changes. In addition, the screenshots for these capplets
> are out of date and do not include the Unlock button.
>
> ** Affects: ubuntu-doc
> Importance: Undecided
> Status: New
>
> --
> Documentation for gnome-control-center does not mention PolicyKit
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/201131
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
> Documentation Project Team, which is subscribed to Ubuntu Documentation.
>

[Matthew East (mdke)]

Opening task on gnome-user-docs, as this provides the documentation for gnome-control-center.

Ideally this bug should be fixed upstream - obviously if someone is interested in working on this from the Ubuntu team we can contribute to work upstream later. If anyone wants mentoring with working on the gnome-user-docs documentation/package, please let me know.

[Dylan McCall (dylanmccall)]

Gah, someone said in a mailing list that PolicyKit is a downstream thing and I looked no further. Obviously, as the GNOME 2.22 release notes say, this is not.

Still, it doesn't hurt to have it filed down here since the GNOME docs team seems quite overwhelmed already, and Hardy needs this fixed before its release. (GNOME's schedule would likely have this on 2.22.1, which would not fit Hardy).

Thus, I propose leaving this open as a bug for the Ubuntu docs team, since they are (theoretically) thinking in a different cycle than the GNOME folks.

[Dylan McCall (dylanmccall)]

Oops, that was misleading! I have filed this upstream: <bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=522162>

[Jeff Gortney (ohwg-dit)]

I would like to assist with this bug but I am completely confused as to where to start. The last post by Dylan indicates that it is a GNOME problem, I go to investigate that bug and find this.

"The Ubuntu bug was actually filed for the correct product, though. Besides, the
mention of PolicyKit is either invalid (because gnome-control-center doesn't
use it at all) or relates to something else (like Gnome System Tools, maybe).

Please don't randomly upstream distribution bugs if you're not famililar with
the respective packages."

What can I do to help and fix this problem. Please be patient with me, I am new to Open Source projects, but I want to contribute in any way I can. Please let me know what I can do to help fix this.

[Matthew East (mdke)]

Jeff,

I'll help you with this. I'm afraid I've been slow to respond to email recently but I did see your mail and will help.

In summary: it is a Gnome problem in the sense that the relevant document is contained in the Gnome User Guide. However, Gnome doesn't use policy kit by default, whereas Ubuntu does. What we need to do is to make some custom changes to the Gnome User Guide as it appears in Ubuntu.

You should start by familiarising yourself with the Ubuntu documentation team's tools and processes by reading the pages at:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DocumentationTeam/Repository and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DocumentationTeam/Contribute

After that, you can get a copy of the Gnome User Guide as it appears in Ubuntu from the bzr branch at:

https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-doc/gnome-user-docs/ubuntu-hardy

If you have any problems, feel free to email the mailing list and we'll try and help.

[Mads Peter Rommedahl (lhademmor)]

According to the GNOME 2.22 Release Notes, PolicyKit should be a part of GNOME officially now. Doesn't that mean that this bug should be forwarded upstream now...?

[Matthew East (mdke)]

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 7:47 AM, Mads Peter Rommedahl
<email address hidden> wrote:
> According to the GNOME 2.22 Release Notes, PolicyKit should be a part of
> GNOME officially now. Doesn't that mean that this bug should be
> forwarded upstream now...?

I think the release notes may be slightly misleading, the position
seems to be that although PolicyKit is available in Gnome, it isn't
enabled by default.

[Dean Sas (dsas)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Matthew East wrote:
> I think the release notes may be slightly misleading, the position
> seems to be that although PolicyKit is available in Gnome, it isn't
> enabled by default.

That's right, there is a discussion on desktop-devel-list at the minute,
it seems as if PolicyKit may be part of gnome or an "allowed dependency"
in intrepid or more likely intrepid+1

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFII1L7eedO8dcp9nYRAmsxAJ4hKZ0riuIkUPxVCLX/vhSinsgCiQCfUG66
e/6iruga3eKW3SqWINV4RJA=
=QGJ2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Charles Profitt (cprofitt)]

Does this project still need assistance? Point me in the right direction and I will assist if still needed.

[Ashiq Al-Moosani (ashiq-almoosani)]

Dear Matthew,
This documentation bug still appears open and shows as offering mentorship by yourself. What can I do to help? Ref. to your message #6 above, "What we need to do is to make some custom changes to the Gnome User Guide as it appears in Ubuntu.". Would this still be a valid solution?

[Matthew East (mdke)]

I would have thought that Gnome is now using PolicyKit by default, in the light of what Dean said in comment 9 above. If so, the issue might be best addressed directly upstream with Gnome by reopening the upstream bug. Does anyone know whether that is correct or not?

Gnome is currently planning on rewriting their user documentation, so the best approach might be to wait for that work to take place (or assist with it).

[Connor Imes (ckimes)]

Closing against Ubuntu Documentation project, bug is open for gnome-user-docs.