unity-design team mailing list archive

[Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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

Scott Kitterman wrote on 22/06/10 18:01:
> 
> "Matthew Paul Thomas" <mpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>...
>> Scott Kitterman wrote on 22/06/10 11:54:
>>>
>>> "Matthew Paul Thomas" <mpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>...
>>>> Yes, we agreed at UDS that we should move towards installing updates
>>>> automatically whenever possible. But it's still important to make
>>>> the interface for manual updates interface the best we can.
>>>
>>> We did?  The current updates framework is almost completely
>>> unsuitable for this. 
>>> ...
>>
>> Yes.
>> <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-m-update-manager-incremental-updates>
>>
> I don't think that's what that spec says.

The blueprint has no spec, but it is what the blueprint says: "attempt
to get unattended-upgrades more used in maverick". I didn't write the
whiteboard, but it matches my recollection of the UDS session.

> It discusses offering automatic updates more prominently and making
> them work better. Your description sounded to me like an intention to
> make them opt-out. As long as they are opt-in, I think that spec is
> completely reasonable.

Nobody I know of has suggested that updates be opt-out for Maverick.

- -- 
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkwrDBgACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecqgOgCfcwsApMZBBL0m8aRTtu4GEI2i
vHAAoLeOt3G8bMtlGJSGnrFBX6+PtDZM
=3f3p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----