Univention Bugzilla – Bug 54963
"Back to startsite" not working link in old management console
Last modified: 2023-10-11 16:39:09 CEST
Created attachment 10963 [details] screenshot The customer uses the old management console in UCS 5 and uses in the hamburger menu the "back to start site" link, which ends in "Page not found" The URL is not existing (anymore)
That's because UMC uses the fragment URL part (#…) for storing the current position. The redirection goes to /univention/ which redirects to /univention/portal/ and preserves the fragment. The portal has no handler for that fragment and shows the 404 Not Found page.
*** Bug 55027 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This is only relevant if the link to UMC as in UCS 4.x is still used in UCS 5.0, but this is deprecated in UCS 5.0.
Customer Feedback: I find it (so far) often more practical to go via the link "UCS@School" from the portal to the UMC, because I can then switch there with different "tabs" nicer between the modules. I would find it a pity if this possibility would be switched off....
Added another Support ticket: 2023053121000191
Customers who upgraded still have old tiles with the link to the management. They also find the old management console clearer and faster, so they still use it, and do not like to not get back to the startpage (portal) https://primary.schein.ig/univention/management/#category=ucs-school-admin results in https://primary.schein.ig/univention/portal/#/category=ucs-school-admin instead of https://primary.schein.ig/univention/portal/#/ If this is a low hanging fruit, it would be great for the customers, if this is fixed.
(In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #3) > This is only relevant if the link to UMC as in UCS 4.x is still used in UCS > 5.0, but this is deprecated in UCS 5.0. Where do I find that the "old UMC" is discontinued? Why is it deprecated but some features are still missing in the "portal UMC" like → * shutdown or reboot the server * using more that one tab for the users module to compare two user settings feedback → * customers say the old UMC is faster especially in @school * customer also say the old UMC is more clearly arranged → need to scroll
(In reply to Christina Scheinig from comment #8) > (In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #3) > > This is only relevant if the link to UMC as in UCS 4.x is still used in UCS > > 5.0, but this is deprecated in UCS 5.0. > > Where do I find that the "old UMC" is discontinued? The landing page of UMC is not linked anymore in new installations and has been removed from the documentation. It is not yet completely removed, as some things are missing in the portal overview like the "reboot" feature. > Why is it deprecated but some features are still missing in the "portal UMC" > like → > * shutdown or reboot the server not yet implemented, needs to be done > * using more that one tab for the users module to compare two user settings this is under discussion, but most customer feedback I had so far was that customers prefer to open two browser tabs instead of having Portal/UMC tabs as additional tab layer. > feedback → > * customers say the old UMC is faster especially in @school Do you know what exactly is faster? (the modules are the same, regardless if they are run in the portal or not) > * customer also say the old UMC is more clearly arranged → need to scroll (in contrast to the UMC starting page) the arrangement of the portal can be customized by the customer, so it can be re-arranged to have the most often needed topics on the top. To be sure: I take the feedback serious and there are improvements needed in the portal. But there is no "way back" to the UMC overview page: future UIs (like those who are implemented for the new roles and rights management) will not be UMC modules, they won't show up in the "old" UMC overview page. Customers will be "forced" to use the portal, so we need to understand which improvements are important. As this bug is initialy about an issue of the "old UMC" landing page I'd like to close it as "WONTFIX" and have new bugs for the needed improvements of the portal.
(In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #9) > > feedback → > > * customers say the old UMC is faster especially in @school > Do you know what exactly is faster? (the modules are the same, regardless if > they are run in the portal or not) Opening new modules is faster in the original UMC because they are built-in into the SPA instead of opened in a new iframe which has to make a new side load, loading all images, stylesheets, the complete dojo framework, other javascript libraries like piwik and many AJAX requests to the UMC server, which are partly pseudo-cached after opening a module once.
(In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #9) > > Why is it deprecated but some features are still missing in the "portal UMC" > > like → > > * shutdown or reboot the server > not yet implemented, needs to be done I have not found a Bug for that > > * using more that one tab for the users module to compare two user settings > this is under discussion, but most customer feedback I had so far was that > customers prefer to open two browser tabs instead of having Portal/UMC tabs > as additional tab layer. I have heard differently, and I understand that, because I feel the same. I also prefer the UMC tabs instead of browser tabs. So why can we satisfy both? > > * customer also say the old UMC is more clearly arranged → need to scroll > (in contrast to the UMC starting page) the arrangement of the portal can be > customized by the customer, so it can be re-arranged to have the most often > needed topics on the top. My customers argument was, that he does not use a touchscreen, but still a normal mouse. And I think it is not the same, making customersation for each UMC Administrator, instead of having a clear overview for all. > To be sure: I take the feedback serious and there are improvements needed in > the portal. But there is no "way back" to the UMC overview page: future UIs > (like those who are implemented for the new roles and rights management) > will not be UMC modules, they won't show up in the "old" UMC overview page. > Customers will be "forced" to use the portal, so we need to understand which > improvements are important. So we should make that clear for the customers and communicate this openly myabe through release notes? > As this bug is initialy about an issue of the "old UMC" landing page I'd > like to close it as "WONTFIX" and have new bugs for the needed improvements > of the portal. No offense, but who is supposed to do this?
(In reply to Christina Scheinig from comment #12) > (In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #9) > > > > Why is it deprecated but some features are still missing in the "portal UMC" > > > like → > > > * shutdown or reboot the server > > not yet implemented, needs to be done > I have not found a Bug for that Only some are already in bugzilla as the discussion took place in internal documents. > > > > * using more that one tab for the users module to compare two user settings > > this is under discussion, but most customer feedback I had so far was that > > customers prefer to open two browser tabs instead of having Portal/UMC tabs > > as additional tab layer. > > I have heard differently, and I understand that, because I feel the same. I > also prefer the UMC tabs instead of browser tabs. So why can we satisfy both? We did a usability test focused on new end users (not administrators, not users of the current UMC) and had negative feedback on "tabs in tabs". Most often critics was that tabs in the portal have many limitations in contrast to browser tabs which confused new users. > > > > * customer also say the old UMC is more clearly arranged → need to scroll > > (in contrast to the UMC starting page) the arrangement of the portal can be > > customized by the customer, so it can be re-arranged to have the most often > > needed topics on the top. > > My customers argument was, that he does not use a touchscreen, but still a > normal mouse. And I think it is not the same, making customersation for each > UMC Administrator, instead of having a clear overview for all. The portal is not optimized for mobile/touchscreen use only - where is the limitation in using it with a mouse in contrast to the UMC overview page? My understanding here was that the main issue in navigation was that the applications are first in the portal and then (scrolling down) UMC modules appear. The customer would like to have UMC modules at the top of the page. Right? > > > > To be sure: I take the feedback serious and there are improvements needed in > > the portal. But there is no "way back" to the UMC overview page: future UIs > > (like those who are implemented for the new roles and rights management) > > will not be UMC modules, they won't show up in the "old" UMC overview page. > > Customers will be "forced" to use the portal, so we need to understand which > > improvements are important. > > So we should make that clear for the customers and communicate this openly > myabe through release notes? yes, we should communicate - I'd prefer a message on the "old" UMC overview page that it is deprecated. > > > As this bug is initialy about an issue of the "old UMC" landing page I'd > > like to close it as "WONTFIX" and have new bugs for the needed improvements > > of the portal. > > No offense, but who is supposed to do this? I - but I kept it open on purpose as there is currently no bug to point to. I'll do as soon as we have some.
(In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #13) > (In reply to Christina Scheinig from comment #12) > > (In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #9) > > > > > > Why is it deprecated but some features are still missing in the "portal UMC" > > > > like → > > > > * shutdown or reboot the server > > > not yet implemented, needs to be done > > I have not found a Bug for that > > Only some are already in bugzilla as the discussion took place in internal > documents. > > > > > * using more that one tab for the users module to compare two user settings > > > this is under discussion, but most customer feedback I had so far was that > > > customers prefer to open two browser tabs instead of having Portal/UMC tabs > > > as additional tab layer. > > > > I have heard differently, and I understand that, because I feel the same. I > > also prefer the UMC tabs instead of browser tabs. So why can we satisfy both? > > We did a usability test focused on new end users (not administrators, not > users of the current UMC) and had negative feedback on "tabs in tabs". Most > often critics was that tabs in the portal have many limitations in contrast > to browser tabs which confused new users. > But shouldn't we ask those people, who are using our UMC/Portal? I love tabs in the browser, I have loads of them, so does the customer I spoke with. So new Tabs in the browser does not make it easier to find thing and especially to compare! > > > > * customer also say the old UMC is more clearly arranged → need to scroll > > > (in contrast to the UMC starting page) the arrangement of the portal can be > > > customized by the customer, so it can be re-arranged to have the most often > > > needed topics on the top. > > > > My customers argument was, that he does not use a touchscreen, but still a > > normal mouse. And I think it is not the same, making customersation for each > > UMC Administrator, instead of having a clear overview for all. > > The portal is not optimized for mobile/touchscreen use only - where is the > limitation in using it with a mouse in contrast to the UMC overview page? > > My understanding here was that the main issue in navigation was that the > applications are first in the portal and then (scrolling down) UMC modules > appear. The customer would like to have UMC modules at the top of the page. > Right? No, that was not what he means. But scrolling at the bottom of the page, which is a long scroll, in some environments, is also not ideal. (My opinion) The customer does not like the arrangement of the tiles, that you have to scroll inside the "big tile" for each category. > > > To be sure: I take the feedback serious and there are improvements needed in > > > the portal. But there is no "way back" to the UMC overview page: future UIs > > > (like those who are implemented for the new roles and rights management) > > > will not be UMC modules, they won't show up in the "old" UMC overview page. > > > Customers will be "forced" to use the portal, so we need to understand which > > > improvements are important. > > > > So we should make that clear for the customers and communicate this openly > > myabe through release notes? > > yes, we should communicate - I'd prefer a message on the "old" UMC overview > page that it is deprecated. About that, I came across some productive environments (school) where there was and still is a tile (always the same, so looks not like a customization) which leads to the old UMC. This looks for me, that we have not removed this tile (and I suspect that they were provided by us as default). Wouldn't that have been the first step if we no longer wanted that to be used? Right when we switch to the new portal? > > > As this bug is initialy about an issue of the "old UMC" landing page I'd > > > like to close it as "WONTFIX" and have new bugs for the needed improvements > > > of the portal. > > > > No offense, but who is supposed to do this? > > I - but I kept it open on purpose as there is currently no bug to point to. > I'll do as soon as we have some.
(In reply to Christina Scheinig from comment #15) > (In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #13) > > (In reply to Christina Scheinig from comment #12) > > > (In reply to Ingo Steuwer from comment #9) [..] > > > > > * using more that one tab for the users module to compare two user settings > > > > this is under discussion, but most customer feedback I had so far was that > > > > customers prefer to open two browser tabs instead of having Portal/UMC tabs > > > > as additional tab layer. > > > > > > I have heard differently, and I understand that, because I feel the same. I > > > also prefer the UMC tabs instead of browser tabs. So why can we satisfy both? > > > > We did a usability test focused on new end users (not administrators, not > > users of the current UMC) and had negative feedback on "tabs in tabs". Most > > often critics was that tabs in the portal have many limitations in contrast > > to browser tabs which confused new users. > > > But shouldn't we ask those people, who are using our UMC/Portal? > I love tabs in the browser, I have loads of them, so does the customer I > spoke with. So new Tabs in the browser does not make it easier to find thing > and especially to compare! ideally it works for all... > > > > > * customer also say the old UMC is more clearly arranged → need to scroll > > > > (in contrast to the UMC starting page) the arrangement of the portal can be > > > > customized by the customer, so it can be re-arranged to have the most often > > > > needed topics on the top. > > > > > > My customers argument was, that he does not use a touchscreen, but still a > > > normal mouse. And I think it is not the same, making customersation for each > > > UMC Administrator, instead of having a clear overview for all. > > > > The portal is not optimized for mobile/touchscreen use only - where is the > > limitation in using it with a mouse in contrast to the UMC overview page? > > > > My understanding here was that the main issue in navigation was that the > > applications are first in the portal and then (scrolling down) UMC modules > > appear. The customer would like to have UMC modules at the top of the page. > > Right? > > No, that was not what he means. But scrolling at the bottom of the page, > which is a long scroll, in some environments, is also not ideal. (My opinion) > The customer does not like the arrangement of the tiles, that you have to > scroll inside the "big tile" for each category. mhm, I'm more confused now... Looking at the current portal, what should be changed? > > > > > To be sure: I take the feedback serious and there are improvements needed in > > > > the portal. But there is no "way back" to the UMC overview page: future UIs > > > > (like those who are implemented for the new roles and rights management) > > > > will not be UMC modules, they won't show up in the "old" UMC overview page. > > > > Customers will be "forced" to use the portal, so we need to understand which > > > > improvements are important. > > > > > > So we should make that clear for the customers and communicate this openly > > > myabe through release notes? > > > > yes, we should communicate - I'd prefer a message on the "old" UMC overview > > page that it is deprecated. > > About that, I came across some productive environments (school) where there > was and still is a tile (always the same, so looks not like a customization) > which leads to the old UMC. This looks for me, that we have not removed this > tile (and I suspect that they were provided by us as default). Wouldn't that > have been the first step if we no longer wanted that to be used? Right when > we switch to the new portal? yes, we discussed that back when we were in the progress of upgrading to UCS 5.0 and decided to not remove tiles in the portal. We can't reliably detect if tiles have been created by UCS installation scripts or by administrators, and we can't reliably detect if the portal migration from UCS 4 to 5 shows the new UMC integration in the portal for all users who need access to the UMC. So we decided to not delete anything to not delete too much. [..]
Another customer is affected from this bug 2023101121000271 UCS 5.0-4 errata 829 System was upgraded from UCS 4.4