Avoiding fragmentation with a rolling release

Matthew Paul Thomas mpt at canonical.com
Sun Mar 3 14:42:02 UTC 2013


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

Steve Langasek wrote on 01/03/13 21:17:
> 
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 05:40:26PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
>> 
>>>> The monthly snapshots would be for users who want the fresh 
>>>> software, but don't want to manage the daily grind of
>>>> updating to ensure that their system is secure. The way I
>>>> think of it is that we "support" 2 cadences for updates,
>>>> daily and monthly.
>>> 
>>> As above, that seems like something we'd want to discourage.
>>> Even so, it is already possible in R, without snapshots. It
>>> takes two clicks:
>>> 
>>> 1. When Software Updater appears, expand "Details of updates".
>>> 
>>> 2. Uncheck the checkbox next to "Other updates", leaving
>>> "Security updates" checked. (These groupings appear only if any
>>> of the updates are security updates.)
>> 
>> This is a good point.  (It has no real-world testing, because we
>> have never had a release where we applied changes both in the
>> release pocket and in -security; we have only had releases where
>> we applied changes only in the release pocket, and releases where
>> we applied changes in both -security and -updates.  That said, I
>> agree that this argument holds up theoretically, and thus we
>> could do this without the complexity of staging everything in
>> -updates.)
> 
> Two clicks sounds simple, but it wouldn't be very obvious to users
> who are meaning to track the monthly that they should be
> un-selecting "other updates".  Is there a good way for us to
> pre-unselect this for users who are opting in to the monthly
> updates?

Again, I am proposing this *instead of* monthly snapshots. There would
be no "track the monthly".

In which case, it would be one more checkbox in the Updates settings,
below "When there are other updates". "When displaying security
updates, select other updates too", or something like that.

- -- 
mpt

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlEzYToACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecq1zwCgnd0tx5Tv28KBe38XrzddWfuE
p5UAn3LQI+PwNNzXT4vgRpGh+/9rGL3R
=COUl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list