Em Ter, 2009-06-16 às 15:48 +0200, Vincenzo Ciancia escreveu: > On 16/06/2009 Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > > > > Ted Gould has been a proponent of a system / hardware indicator, and > > I've been working on how to handle things like USB-unmount and > > Bluetooth-connect and am coming round to the idea. What do you guys > > think? If there's support for the idea, we could do a round of design > > work and present it here for more detailed discussion. > > > > Do you mean like the messaging indicator but for system messages? If so, > would it also handle update-manager interactions? I think this has been > proposed by many both here and on the u-m bug so there should be wide > consensus. I'd love it. >
+1 here. Finally, I would also like to emphasize the fact the the "vocal minority of power users" that are complaining about the new update-notifier behavior would be happy enough if there was as *supported* way to fall back to the old behavior (or to adopt the new behavior suggested in my first email). The main problem for us, pop-under "haters", is that there is no *supported* way to avoid it but to turn off update-notifier entirely. Finally, I would like to stress that the new update-manager introduced what I think is a paper cut. Here is what usually happened to me before I reverted update-manager back to the old behavior using the unsupported option: I see the pop-under in the middle of my work, decide to close the update-manager to keep on working (and to get rid of the update-manager application in my alt-tab list). Update manager closes and only comes back many days later. There is no trace left in that session that I have updates available. To me this is a paper cut, and a dangerous one, as I would be updating my machine less often. A much better approach was already suggested in this thread. Update-notifier should display a permanent notification (in the notification panel or in the indicator-applet or in the new system indicator, or wherever people think is appropriate, but with a clear visible sign) to remember me that the updates are available if the user closes update-manager without upgrading. Paulo. Obs: Sincerely, it is easy enough for me to turn off update-manager completely and still get permanent notifications, a simple scripts that calls apt-get update followed by a email saying that updates are available would do. However I do care about other users that can not code that easily. I do think that the new behavior is much worse than the old one and can in many cases lead to fewer updates not more. -- Paulo José da Silva e Silva Professor Associado, Dep. de Ciência da Computação (Associate Professor, Computer Science Dept.) Universidade de São Paulo - Brazil e-mail: pjssi...@ime.usp.br Web: http://www.ime.usp.br/~pjssilva Teoria é o que não entendemos o (Theory is something we don't) suficiente para chamar de prática. (understand well enough to call practice) _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
