On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 10:55 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > > > 2) I have to dig through the menu to trigger updates(Hmm, is that > > preferences or administration? I can never remember). Annoying for a > > regular task. > > > > Again. Updates are not a regular task for regular users. But they are a part of life for some of us. And we had a process that worked and wasn't particularly annoying. I'm not saying that we should go back to the old way. But don't you think going forward you should have something in place that is at least as convenient for those of us that put our blood, sweat and tears into this distro? I like the updates on reboot. ALOT. I'm not married to the notification area. Kill it dead if you have a good solution in the workspaces thread that provides a panel shortcut concept. That's my only concern. But please think long and hard about throwing a pop-down on desktop for any reason. I know it's just for security updates, but they can be handled at reboot. If they decline for 20th time, scold them with a dialog. But make it synchronous based on the users intent to reboot. If they never intend to reboot(kiosk), then maybe this is question best asked during installation and a strongly worded suggestion presented for continuous updates. It's less for you to keep up with. It provides a consistent path for the user. And it resolves a security hole, I assure you. > excitement. It makes you important to us, which is why I'm taking the > time to answer this for the umpteenth time, I'm not sure why I am so blessed. :) > Some security updates are not active until you reboot. Period. If > there is a security problem in your kernel, you need a new kernel, and > you need to boot it. We're done a lot of work to minimise the number > of cases where that's important, but I'm not aware of any way to > eliminate the occasional requirement of a reboot. I understand that and it's a strong argument for putting ALL updates and notifications at the point of reboot for consistency. > > > > That's what MPT is arguing for. Your response is "the crux of the > > > problem is the asynchronous window". But you're missing the point that > > > the underlying condition is both serious and asynchronous. > > > > > My understanding of the problem is both thorough and profound. > > > > > > But your arguments are not entirely persuasive :-) Ditto, my kind sir. :) > > And you think malware couldn't put up a systray icon tricking you into > thinking you have updates? You think you would be able to tell the > difference? The panel icon is just as fakeable as the popup. I'm not going to respond directly to this as I think it was adequately covered by both chow, Conscious user, Paulo and others. I am strongly in their camp. We are both busy people so I don't intend to belabor the point. We were asked by MPT to present our cases against it and I did. I see a potential solution in your specifications, but I also see a primary solution that has some serious drawbacks, which I have pointed out. I truly hope some thought will be put into the points I've made.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature