Auto-launching of applications

[Chow Loong Jin]

On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 11:42 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Mark Shuttleworth [2009-02-25  9:20 +0000]:
> > In this case, there are definitely things we can do which would improve
> > both, and there are also things we can do which ensure that we only pay
> > the price the user *wants* to pay, *when* they want to pay it. For
> > example, deferring heavy lifting and parsing until we know the user
> > actually wants to proceed.
> 
> A considerable part of that price comes from firing up python, loading
> gtk, glade, and half a dozen other modules, etc. It's not easy to
> reduce that startup cost, short of rewriting u-m in C (which we don't
> really want IMHO).
> 
> > I very much want the work that comes from this initiative to be
> > *stylish*, *fast* and *robust*, so any suggestions you have for the
> > engineering team on the latter will be taken seriously, especially if
> > they come with patches! We will have full test suites to address the
> > latter point.
> 
> Just for the record, ideas which were discussed yesterday:
> 
> Security updates:
> -----------------
> Instead of immediately bringing up u-manager, u-notifier could just
> pop up a message box
> 
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------
>   There are security updates available for your computer which you
>   ought to install.
> 
>     [ Install now ] [ Details... ] [ Remind me later ]
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> "Install now" would forego the u-m list view and immediately start
> updates. "Details" would open u-m as usual, but only when the user
> actually acknowledges the dialog and wants to act on it. "Remind me
> later" would just close the dialog.
> 
> u-m should also provide an obvious path to enabling automatic updates.
> 
> Bug fixes:
> ----------
> 
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------
>   There are updates available for your computer which fix important
>   problems and errors.
> 
>     [ Install now ] [ Details... ] [ Remind me later ]
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> So this looks and works similar, just with a different rationale.
> Here, update-notifier should provide an obvious path how to disable
> notifications about bug fixes entirely, since not all users want them
> (but at the same time we don't want them to disable update-notifier
> entirely, to retain security updates and reboot notifications).
> 
> Martin
> 
> -- 
> Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
> Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)
> 
This brings to mind some issue that was mentioned earlier in this thread
about how having these dialogs could encourage an influx of fake dialogs
on websites that entice you to just click on it without looking.

While I don't really think of this as a good idea, perhaps it would be
good for first-time discovery of the software updates feature, so I'm
not completely against it. However, it could get irritating in the long
run, so how about having a checkbox "Don't show this update again" and a
dialog that says "You can access this window via _______" or something?

Regards, 
Chow Loong Jin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20090226/732c1558/attachment.pgp