Written by bluenova the 23 Apr 09 at 07:44.

Rather than asking for the users password when clicking 'Check' in the update manager, ask for the password when the user clicks 'Install Updates'.

Rather than asking for the users password when clicking 'Check' in the update manager, ask for the password when the user clicks 'Install Updates'.

Written by grofaty the 25 Apr 09 at 19:13.

Now Ubuntu has an option in System | Administration | Software Sources | Update tab to install security updates automatically. Make an option to automatically install all updates.

Now Ubuntu has an option in System | Administration | Software Sources | Update tab to install security updates automatically. Make an option to automatically install all updates.

Written by tchalvakspam the 26 Aug 09 at 17:11.

The real issue is even gathering the information (which may tell you that there are no updates needed) requires the password step. So currently, there is a zero-benefit step:
Action: Open up update-manager. Effect: Nothing changes from before.
Action: Click check and put in password. Effect: Check for newer updates.
Action: Click Install updates. Effect: Finally install updates.

Because opening up update-manager is a declaration of the wish to at least check for updates, this should be revised to:

Action: Open up update-manager. Effect: perform check for updates, but download nothing.

Action: Click install updates and put in password. Effect: download & install currently "checked" updates.

The real issue is even gathering the information (which may tell you that there are no updates needed) requires the password step. So currently, there is a zero-benefit step: Action: Open up update-manager. Effect: Nothing changes from before. Action: Click check and put in password. Effect: Check for newer updates. Action: Click Install updates. Effect: Finally install updates. Because opening up update-manager is a declaration of the wish to at least check for updates, this should be revised to: Action: Open up update-manager. Effect: perform check for updates, but download nothing. Action: Click install updates and put in password. Effect: download & install currently "checked" updates.

Written by jonasPlatte the 1 Dec 11 at 20:46.

The GPG-key should automatically be imported when you add a ppa using the "Software-sources" settings.
But, for security reasons, there should not only be a prompt to type your password, but a prompt that tells you for example that the operation you want to do could be dangerous for the system and that you should only do this if you trust the source.

The GPG-key should automatically be imported when you add a ppa using the "Software-sources" settings. But, for security reasons, there should not only be a prompt to type your password, but a prompt that tells you for example that the operation you want to do could be dangerous for the system and that you should only do this if you trust the source.

Written by jonasPlatte the 1 Dec 11 at 20:52.

I also think it would be good that when you try to install (Software Center) or update (Update Manager) some packages, which source is "untrusted" (no GPG-key of the author imported) then you should get a prompt that asks you if you are really sure to install / update that package(s) instead of getting an failure dialog box.

I also think it would be good that when you try to install (Software Center) or update (Update Manager) some packages, which source is "untrusted" (no GPG-key of the author imported) then you should get a prompt that asks you if you are really sure to install / update that package(s) instead of getting an failure dialog box.

Written by hspaans the 13 Jul 08 at 15:47.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #11084 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #11084 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Afroman10496 the 6 Aug 09 at 20:15.

Totally change the interface of it to show more info, telling average users simple but important info and enhancing it with features like:

- Show the importance of the update, with colored circles or boxes showing how important it is

- Group them into tabs (according to their sub-menu in the Gnome Menu's hierarchy), like [Overview][Accessories][Games][Graphics] and so on.

- Tell the users the new features of the upgrade

- Tell the users if the update will require any restarts of anything in advance.

Totally change the interface of it to show more info, telling average users simple but important info and enhancing it with features like: - Show the importance of the update, with colored circles or boxes showing how important it is - Group them into tabs (according to their sub-menu in the Gnome Menu's hierarchy), like [Overview][Accessories][Games][Graphics] and so on. - Tell the users the new features of the upgrade - Tell the users if the update will require any restarts of anything in advance.

Written by Rodrigo the 7 Aug 09 at 16:34.

Looking at the ideas of the past days I came across one that pointed me towards this:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppCenter
please have a look.
I think is a great idea.

Looking at the ideas of the past days I came across one that pointed me towards this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppCenter please have a look. I think is a great idea.

Written by chrismounce the 12 Aug 09 at 23:27.

Most users don't need to know the names of all the packages that are being upgraded. It might make things look less scary if, say, all the security-related updates were lumped together into one item in the Update Manager. And not just group those updates together -- I mean *completely hide* the names of all the security-related upgrades, so the user only sees *one* security-related item in the list.

Power users should still be able to get a list of what each update contains. But regular users shouldn't be overwhelmed with 50 different package names, when all they need to know is that there's 37 MB of system upgrades, 2 MB of security patches, and a new version of Firefox.

Most users don't need to know the names of all the packages that are being upgraded. It might make things look less scary if, say, all the security-related updates were lumped together into one item in the Update Manager. And not just group those updates together -- I mean *completely hide* the names of all the security-related upgrades, so the user only sees *one* security-related item in the list. Power users should still be able to get a list of what each update contains. But regular users shouldn't be overwhelmed with 50 different package names, when all they need to know is that there's 37 MB of system upgrades, 2 MB of security patches, and a new version of Firefox.

Written by darkerego the 16 Aug 09 at 07:27.

When you go to install programs or updates, they are not in order, which could cause someone to possibly install the wrong upgrade or application that may cause problems in the future. I propose that categories should be made organize data so you can find exactly what you're looking for.

When you go to install programs or updates, they are not in order, which could cause someone to possibly install the wrong upgrade or application that may cause problems in the future. I propose that categories should be made organize data so you can find exactly what you're looking for.

Written by Penguin Guy the 16 Aug 09 at 18:18.

AppCenter is quite a neat idea, they should work on an option for that to update just before the computer shuts down rather than slowing your computer down while you're using it. This option should be disabled by default.

AppCenter is quite a neat idea, they should work on an option for that to update just before the computer shuts down rather than slowing your computer down while you're using it. This option should be disabled by default.

Written by oliver-joos the 27 Aug 09 at 23:38.

(Similar but not equal to #3!)

The Update Manager lists updatable packages. Below the list you can unfold a text field that describes what changed in the currently selected package.

I propose to group together all packages that have the very same text of changes! Each package should still be un/checkable for updating individually. But only a whole group should be selectable. Further the context menu in the list could also show "Check Group" and "Uncheck Group".

In contrast to #3 no info is hidden! I even miss the total number of updatable packages that Gutsy or Feisty once had shown.

(Similar but not equal to #3!) The Update Manager lists updatable packages. Below the list you can unfold a text field that describes what changed in the currently selected package. I propose to group together all packages that have the very same text of changes! Each package should still be un/checkable for updating individually. But only a whole group should be selectable. Further the context menu in the list could also show "Check Group" and "Uncheck Group". In contrast to #3 no info is hidden! I even miss the total number of updatable packages that Gutsy or Feisty once had shown.

Written by nave.notnilc the 30 Aug 09 at 17:09.

It is currently simple, straightforward, and concise.

It is currently simple, straightforward, and concise.

Written by LnxDeeGee the 31 Aug 09 at 01:17.

I agree that the existing system is quite poor.
I should not see so much mess in the app list. Searching for a specific app to install also should never return Beta or Source unless I've chosen to see those.

I'm 100% against AppCenter!
One of the most irritating things about Linux is all of the abandoned/orphaned/code-rot apps. How many different apps like this do we need and must we have installed?
Please do not release a different app to manage this, the source exists for the other apps, just take the best one and update it to a new version that has the required features.
There should never be multiple/duplicate/abandoned apps for the base OS... EVER!

I agree that the existing system is quite poor. I should not see so much mess in the app list. Searching for a specific app to install also should never return Beta or Source unless I've chosen to see those. I'm 100% against AppCenter! One of the most irritating things about Linux is all of the abandoned/orphaned/code-rot apps. How many different apps like this do we need and must we have installed? Please do not release a different app to manage this, the source exists for the other apps, just take the best one and update it to a new version that has the required features. There should never be multiple/duplicate/abandoned apps for the base OS... EVER!

Written by k33l0r the 22 Jan 09 at 10:02.

Add a checkbox that will allow the user to view more advanced information about the updates. (Version numbers, etc...)

Add a checkbox that will allow the user to view more advanced information about the updates. (Version numbers, etc...)

Written by vexorian the 1 Feb 09 at 16:23.

The changes tab seems to be a good enough place to place this information. Version currently installed is not much more of an advanced information than the change log.

The changes tab seems to be a good enough place to place this information. Version currently installed is not much more of an advanced information than the change log.

Written by Whitefort the 12 Sep 08 at 15:30.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #13094 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #13094 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Baggers the 18 Apr 09 at 10:59.

Simply give back this feature and if need be allow the user to disable it through a GUI interface. We can easily use the new notification system to display the message while keeping the update notifier icon in the panel.

Simply give back this feature and if need be allow the user to disable it through a GUI interface. We can easily use the new notification system to display the message while keeping the update notifier icon in the panel.

Written by macvr the 20 Apr 09 at 16:45.

***as the devs are making a conscious effort to not have the notifications icon***

rather than a pop-under window,display the updates as larger notification bubbles[notify-osd bubbles]

and as devs already have the idea of action buttons in the fallback alerts[ https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotifyOSD#Fallback%20alert%20boxes ], it would be nice if there was only just have a single button for the user to choose "update now" from the fallback alerts which look like the notify-osd alerts,

and making the notify-osd stay longer for these update/restart notifications...

if the user doesnt wasnt to update the bubble disappears or could hover over the bubble to make it invisible as the notify-osd works now

and have an option for the repeat reminder ,at x mins , which users can choose from in the updates notification settings tab...

so they end up being less intrusive (as the devs hope to achieve) than the pop-under windows...

***as the devs are making a conscious effort to not have the notifications icon*** rather than a pop-under window,display the updates as larger notification bubbles[notify-osd bubbles] and as devs already have the idea of action buttons in the fallback alerts[ https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotifyOSD#Fallback%20alert%20boxes ], it would be nice if there was only just have a single button for the user to choose "update now" from the fallback alerts which look like the notify-osd alerts, and making the notify-osd stay longer for these update/restart notifications... if the user doesnt wasnt to update the bubble disappears or could hover over the bubble to make it invisible as the notify-osd works now and have an option for the repeat reminder ,at x mins , which users can choose from in the updates notification settings tab... so they end up being less intrusive (as the devs hope to achieve) than the pop-under windows...

Written by kazagistar the 20 Apr 09 at 18:36.

Whenever an application wants to inform the user of something, or get feedback on something, it should use bubbles... that much makes sense. But when it NEEDS something, when something is so urgent that you would go through all this trouble to make absolutely sure a user acts on its notification, then why is it not done automatically?

Of course, I know there is a major problem with this; specifically a large chunk of the user community (myself included!) don't want our system updating automatically, and hate things that change under our feet with a burning passion. But we are all "advanced users". The entire update process (waiting for a time when computer activity is low, clicking a button, watching it contact repositories, reviewing selected updates, watching the downloads and installations) are useless to those people who don't know what any of these things mean. They just want to do work, and have a secure system.

So how about this: under installation settings, there is an advanced button. Under there, add a new checkbox for "Automatically update this computer" that allows power users to easily control and monitor their setup, but keep it checked by default, so that normal users never have to worry about this.

Whenever an application wants to inform the user of something, or get feedback on something, it should use bubbles... that much makes sense. But when it NEEDS something, when something is so urgent that you would go through all this trouble to make absolutely sure a user acts on its notification, then why is it not done automatically? Of course, I know there is a major problem with this; specifically a large chunk of the user community (myself included!) don't want our system updating automatically, and hate things that change under our feet with a burning passion. But we are all "advanced users". The entire update process (waiting for a time when computer activity is low, clicking a button, watching it contact repositories, reviewing selected updates, watching the downloads and installations) are useless to those people who don't know what any of these things mean. They just want to do work, and have a secure system. So how about this: under installation settings, there is an advanced button. Under there, add a new checkbox for "Automatically update this computer" that allows power users to easily control and monitor their setup, but keep it checked by default, so that normal users never have to worry about this.

Written by curiousdannii the 24 Apr 09 at 16:13.

Whether or not a notification icon should be displayed the moment updates are available is still under debate.

I think though that after the popunder window has been shown, a persistent notification icon should definitely be added if the window was ignored or closed after X amount of time.

Whether or not a notification icon should be displayed the moment updates are available is still under debate. I think though that after the popunder window has been shown, a persistent notification icon should definitely be added if the window was ignored or closed after X amount of time.

Written by conscious the 25 Apr 09 at 06:18.

When there are updates, notify the user with the new-style bubble ("You have N updates available, ..."). This should happen as often as set in Software Sources (every 1/2/7/14 days).

To allow the user to install updates, and to let the user be aware of updates in cases where they missed the bubble, use the envelope icon. It will show green light for some time, and clicking it will reveal a menu containing "Update manager" item. (Just like Pidgin's "user is online" notifications work, but timeout can be set somewhat longer.)

When there are updates, notify the user with the new-style bubble ("You have N updates available, ..."). This should happen as often as set in Software Sources (every 1/2/7/14 days). To allow the user to install updates, and to let the user be aware of updates in cases where they missed the bubble, use the envelope icon. It will show green light for some time, and clicking it will reveal a menu containing "Update manager" item. (Just like Pidgin's "user is online" notifications work, but timeout can be set somewhat longer.)

Written by slsolaris the 29 Apr 09 at 16:46.

so we can click on it when we have new updates

so we can click on it when we have new updates

Written by paul-lockett the 29 Apr 09 at 19:06.

Those who want to be notified about updates straight away could activate the applet through "Add to Panel", those who don't want it could remove it easily and as it wouldn't sit in the notification area, it wouldn't clash with the new notification system.

It could use the same icons as the old notifier and when there are no updates, the applet could either appear blank (a bit like the Disk Mounter Applet) or display an icon which indicates that the system is up to date.

Those who want to be notified about updates straight away could activate the applet through "Add to Panel", those who don't want it could remove it easily and as it wouldn't sit in the notification area, it wouldn't clash with the new notification system. It could use the same icons as the old notifier and when there are no updates, the applet could either appear blank (a bit like the Disk Mounter Applet) or display an icon which indicates that the system is up to date.

Written by LanoxxthShaddow the 1 May 09 at 10:51.

in the "Updates" tab of "Software Sources" there should be an option that says: "Show notification icon if updates available" (opt-in) and another option that says: "Automatically open update-manager if updates available" (opt-out).

Optional:
The update-manager it self should also contain a checkbox that reads: "Automatically open this window if updates are available." And an "Advanced"-Button that opens the "Updates" tab in "Software Sources" to configure behaviour.

in the "Updates" tab of "Software Sources" there should be an option that says: "Show notification icon if updates available" (opt-in) and another option that says: "Automatically open update-manager if updates available" (opt-out). Optional: The update-manager it self should also contain a checkbox that reads: "Automatically open this window if updates are available." And an "Advanced"-Button that opens the "Updates" tab in "Software Sources" to configure behaviour.

Written by jonasfa the 9 May 09 at 03:56.

Display a notify-osd bubble every 1 hour to remind the user about the updates

Display a notify-osd bubble every 1 hour to remind the user about the updates

Written by vexorian the 12 May 09 at 15:52.

The current behaviour is better at forcing users to update (launching minimized update manager) however, if SECURITY updates are skipped, the old icon should go to the tray notification are as it did before.

The current behaviour is better at forcing users to update (launching minimized update manager) however, if SECURITY updates are skipped, the old icon should go to the tray notification are as it did before.

Written by derLars the 16 May 09 at 18:39.

PROPOSAL:
Logging out of the system (which also includes shutdown and reboots) should propose to update the system, if the user is entitled to do so. This could be easily implemented in the current "you'll be logged off in NN seconds"-message by adding a warning icon, the message

"There are pending updates - should they be installed before [logging off|shutting down|rebooting]? The computer will be [shut down|rebooted] afterwards."

and adding a third button "update before [logout|shutdown|reboot]".


PRO:
Although I highly dislike too nervy messages, the casual user does not care much about updates and risks having his computer hacked. Through this solution, the user impact would be minimal and needed reboots of the system wouldn't stress the user, since he did not want use the system anymore for now anyway.


PROBLEMS:
Of course, this proposal doesn't work for users that never log off, so another solution would have to be found for that case.

PROPOSAL: Logging out of the system (which also includes shutdown and reboots) should propose to update the system, if the user is entitled to do so. This could be easily implemented in the current "you'll be logged off in NN seconds"-message by adding a warning icon, the message "There are pending updates - should they be installed before [logging off|shutting down|rebooting]? The computer will be [shut down|rebooted] afterwards." and adding a third button "update before [logout|shutdown|reboot]". PRO: Although I highly dislike too nervy messages, the casual user does not care much about updates and risks having his computer hacked. Through this solution, the user impact would be minimal and needed reboots of the system wouldn't stress the user, since he did not want use the system anymore for now anyway. PROBLEMS: Of course, this proposal doesn't work for users that never log off, so another solution would have to be found for that case.

Written by leandromartinez98 the 14 Jun 09 at 23:43.

The idea is that for important and persistent notifications, the "System" menu should be highlighted, and show some ocasional blinking. The user would notice that and click on it. A new menu item would be present there, in which a more clear notification is provided. For other interfaces, the "root" menu could be highlighted and blink. For example, the K of the main KDE menu could blink and change color if updates (or other important notifications) are available. When the user clicks on it, a new menu item would be present, in first plane and highlighted, providing the important user information and waiting for feedback. This behaviour seems to be more informative than the notification icon and less intrusive than the popup.

This is mockup for the default gnome interface:

The idea is that for important and persistent notifications, the "System" menu should be highlighted, and show some ocasional blinking. The user would notice that and click on it. A new menu item would be present there, in which a more clear notification is provided. For other interfaces, the "root" menu could be highlighted and blink. For example, the K of the main KDE menu could blink and change color if updates (or other important notifications) are available. When the user clicks on it, a new menu item would be present, in first plane and highlighted, providing the important user information and waiting for feedback. This behaviour seems to be more informative than the notification icon and less intrusive than the popup. This is mockup for the default gnome interface: <img src="http://launchpadlibrarian.net/27499653/notification_idea.png" width=50%>

Written by joeblurton the 25 Feb 10 at 11:20.

Remove the need to autogenerate on more than one occasion.

Remove the need to autogenerate on more than one occasion.

Written by ziroday the 14 Jan 09 at 11:50.

Before upgrading a system have a dialog box warning the user about regressions and a large link to the release notes so that they can check for any identified regressions against their hardware. It should also contain information on how to view what hardware you currently have (possibly through hardinfo or something similar).

Before upgrading a system have a dialog box warning the user about regressions and a large link to the release notes so that they can check for any identified regressions against their hardware. It should also contain information on how to view what hardware you currently have (possibly through hardinfo or something similar).

Written by Seph_VII the 14 Jan 09 at 21:14.

Before upgrading or installing Ubuntu, make it check an online(or on-cd, if installing from a LiveCD) blacklist of incompatible hardware. If incompatible hardware is found, make Ubuntu warn the user, and ask whether he/she still wants to continue.

Before upgrading or installing Ubuntu, make it check an online(or on-cd, if installing from a LiveCD) blacklist of incompatible hardware. If incompatible hardware is found, make Ubuntu warn the user, and ask whether he/she still wants to continue.

Written by ruben the 26 Jan 09 at 21:09.

The function i have in mind is a simple undo of an update or even a package installation.
Unlike apt-get --perge remove it would also delete any unneaded dependancies simmilar to autoremove. However this would make it possible to install updates and then if it didn't work undo the change. Including any movement of files or changes in other files.

The problem i see with an upgrade advisor is that it can never actually say if it will work as only trial and error can. Or at least in most cases. Also it is very possible that the upgrade advisor does not have all the correct information for all systems and thus advises incorrectly. Furthermore advice given need to be based on information gather beforehand. Thus an easy undo feature would make upgrading a lot less risky.

It would be even better if this feature could some how be accessed from recovery mode or a live cd to repair if the system was rendered unboot able. This feature should be a used in conjunction with an upgrade advisor. Perhaps more as a long run solution

The function i have in mind is a simple undo of an update or even a package installation. Unlike apt-get --perge remove it would also delete any unneaded dependancies simmilar to autoremove. However this would make it possible to install updates and then if it didn't work undo the change. Including any movement of files or changes in other files. The problem i see with an upgrade advisor is that it can never actually say if it will work as only trial and error can. Or at least in most cases. Also it is very possible that the upgrade advisor does not have all the correct information for all systems and thus advises incorrectly. Furthermore advice given need to be based on information gather beforehand. Thus an easy undo feature would make upgrading a lot less risky. It would be even better if this feature could some how be accessed from recovery mode or a live cd to repair if the system was rendered unboot able. This feature should be a used in conjunction with an upgrade advisor. Perhaps more as a long run solution

Written by torkiano the 30 Jan 09 at 20:45.

Smolt is a hardware profiler to enable users to submit their hardware profiles during installation.

Smolt, like PackageKit from Fedora is also a distribution neutral tool and collects stats anonymously and sends it to a central database.

It became clear quite quickly that it does not make sense to have a per-distro solution for that - if we want to have momentum with a hardware database a combined effort promises the most.

Fedora and Opensuse already implemented it.

See http://smolts.org/
http://www.osnews.com/story/20621/Smolt_gets_adopted_by_openSUSE

Smolt is a hardware profiler to enable users to submit their hardware profiles during installation. Smolt, like PackageKit from Fedora is also a distribution neutral tool and collects stats anonymously and sends it to a central database. It became clear quite quickly that it does not make sense to have a per-distro solution for that - if we want to have momentum with a hardware database a combined effort promises the most. Fedora and Opensuse already implemented it. See http://smolts.org/ http://www.osnews.com/story/20621/Smolt_gets_adopted_by_openSUSE

Written by Felix_the_Mac the 29 Feb 08 at 23:16.

Update Manager should analyse the dependencies in packages which need updating and download the packages with no dependencies first (that is no dependencies on packages which themselves need updating), followed by files which only depended on the first package downloaded etc.

This will allow updates to be installed in parallel - as soon as the first package is downloaded it can be installed.

Update Manager should analyse the dependencies in packages which need updating and download the packages with no dependencies first (that is no dependencies on packages which themselves need updating), followed by files which only depended on the first package downloaded etc. This will allow updates to be installed in parallel - as soon as the first package is downloaded it can be installed.