Il giorno mar, 31/03/2009 alle 11.40 +, Brian J. Murrell ha scritto:
>
> I never minimize my pidgin windows. I also use devilspie to have them
> skip the tasklist and be visible on all workspaces. As a tool,
> pidgin/IM is as important to me as are the panels and window
> management,
> etc.
On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 07:37 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:
>
> Not completely clear: do you have your IM open minimised windows in
> front of you or what is your preferred method of being notified?
No. I have two windows (I use pidgin) displayed all of the time. I
never minimize them. One win
On 30/03/2009 Brian J. Murrell wrote:
>
> Disagree. I don't fiddle with my IM status. If I'm busy, I just
> ignore
> you because you don't get to pop up a window in front of my work. I
> deal with you when I have a chance. I expect to treat my System in
> the
> same way.
Not completely clea
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 20:50 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:
>
> Now that gives me one more argument to adopt the "instant messaging"
> interaction pattern: users deal with IM every day. When they don't want
> to be disturbed they set their status to "busy". We have support for
> this in the FUSA
On 30/03/2009 Michael Rooney wrote:
> > > But the windows itself could be minimised. Let's explore that. I
> > > think it may be too late for Jaunty but I'll see what we can do.
> > >
>
> That is a really wonderful idea! I think this would solve a lot of the
> usability issues and also eliminate a
Jamin W. Collins wrote:
>
> If a window is minimized on one workspace, and the user is on any
> other workspace, clicking on the window in the window list on the
> panel does nothing other than flash the entry. The use has to be on
> the same workspace the window was minimized on in order to resto
Michael Rooney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:56 AM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
>
>> But the windows itself could be minimised. Let's explore that. I
>> think it may be too late for Jaunty but I'll see what we can do.
>
> That is a really wonderful idea! I think this would solve a lot of the
>
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:56 AM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> But the windows itself could be minimised. Let's explore that. I
> think it may be too late for Jaunty but I'll see what we can do.
>
That is a really wonderful idea! I think this would solve a lot of the
usability issues and also elimin
Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:
> I see your point, but we all know from years of experience that
> pop-ups and pop-unders are only considered an annoyance by users, and
> that they don't fit for the purpose. That's why most of us were proud
> of the gnome way: to avoid as many pop-ups as possible. This ga
On 27/03/2009 Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> We have good usability information that says that notification areas
> are
> swamps. They are swamps on Windows, and swamps in all the Linux
> distributions.
Dear Mark,
I see your point, but we all know from years of experience that pop-ups
and pop-under
Op vrijdag 27-03-2009 om 19:29 uur [tijdzone +], schreef Mark
Shuttleworth:
> Back to the notification area. If we're going to clean up the panel and
> the notification area, we should start with the system pieces. Those
> include the restart-required icon, and the updates-available icon. So
>
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 20:26 +, Iain Lane wrote:
>
> No, they pop in the background, unfocused. I personally don't think this
> is the right behaviour either, but at least it's not disruptive in that
> way. Nobody would be insane enough to try that ;)
So hidden under all of the other windows t
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 20:13 +, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 19:29 +, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> > Nothing like a healthy debate.
>
> Indeed. So let's kick it off with where we stand right now and that's
> (afaik, correct me if I'm wrong) no notification icon anymore and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 19:29 +, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
>> Nothing like a healthy debate.
>
> Indeed. So let's kick it off with where we stand right now and that's
> (afaik, correct me if I'm wrong) no notification icon
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 19:29 +, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> Nothing like a healthy debate.
Indeed. So let's kick it off with where we stand right now and that's
(afaik, correct me if I'm wrong) no notification icon anymore and an
update-manager window that pops up once-a-week (in absence of cri
Nothing like a healthy debate. But please let's keep it stylish,
informative and pleasant. There are some comments here that are not very
Ubuntu. Please take a breath, and pour some water on any flames you're
about to throw. They don't help.
Now, some folks are saying "why wasn't I consulted about
>From security point of view this idea sounds horrible. There is claim
that this is made to improve security but only way to do it is make
automatic security update install default in new installations.
Here is one good idea that is implemented very badly. So my idea of
implementing removal of ico
If it would be possible to reverse behavior for next releases - great,
let's try this new way. Let users bash or glorify us. But if we get
serious bashing, those who decided that we should go this way (even
though majority of us don't like it), should admit they are wrong and
kill this idea.
Remem
Assigning to the dxteam, per the regression tracking process.
** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu Jaunty)
Assignee: (unassigned) => dx team (dxteam)
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a
Bah, sorry, assigned to the wrong team.
** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu Jaunty)
Assignee: dx team (dxteam) => Canonical DX team (canonical-dx-team)
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you ar
I would like to second (third, fourth?) the point that while cleaning up the
notification area is a good idea as applications are abusing it, the update
-notification- icon IS A NOTIFICATION!
Surely that means it is something that does belong there, and shouldn't be
messed with?
I think removin
I'd like to point out that the "old" notification style is still used by
apport, where the notification text points to the icon in the
notification area. Including a picture of the icon would in my opinion
ease the understanding of the upgrade request. Also, notifications seems
to start close to th
Vadim, you'll want someone like Mark commenting on this, or a member of
the DX team. Any other developer won't cut it (as we're effectively
users in this instance, and many of us don't like these changes either).
Also, i'm not sure this *particular* bit was mentioned at UDS - I
remember seeing th
** Also affects: update-notifier (Ubuntu Jaunty)
Importance: High
Status: Confirmed
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubun
Will there be any words on this?
It's bad enough that this feature was practically not covered anywhere
public but the UDS (personally I did not sit and listen to every uds session
or read every transcript, I'd expect something important to show up in a
publicly visible space like planet ubuntu or
I really don't understand how a pop-under window is supposed to notify
the user about anything. A pop-under just isn't obvious at all. If I'm
using Windows, I often find myself annoyed at any window that appears on
my task bar without me specifically launching it.
The current Ibex method seems per
I know it's just a "me too" comment, but this issue is serious enough so
I add it.
Most people here are right, as a simple user, the new mechanism is a
pain and a big regression. I think this effort is a waste of time and
resources.
Open a window periodically is simply bad and somewhat aggressive
YES !!!
I followed the hint from the blog and it has helped! The orange icon is
there... I had to downgrade one package manually with dpkg to give it try :-)
In the terminal run:
gconftool -s --type bool /apps/update-notifier/auto_launch false
and then either logout/login from X or restart upd
Looking at this blog post:
http://amber.redvoodoo.org/2009/03/ubuntu-chronicles-saga-of-amber-
and_23.html
There's a way to at least get the old icon notifier back.
** Also affects: ubuntu-release-notes
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
Entirely agree with ruban, the notifier icon for updates (as implemented
in Intrepid) is simply perfect. As against, no one like unsolicited
windows. Please restore the old behavior.
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug noti
Matthew Paul Thomas wrote on 2009-02-23: (permalink)
"... clean up the notification area, and in particular to stop using it for
things that it cannot actually recognizably notify people of ... but we think
making update installation more obvious will make Ubuntu more secure for more
people."
Well,
"the obvious solution, that is, put a button into the popup notification,
would not work well."
The new notifications are designed to be non-clickable. Again, design
decision. When you hover your mouse over them, they dissapear / fade out to
reveal the content below and clicks go through.
I know that this bug addresses the issue of users not understanding
where to click when the popup alert about updates came out. I can't
understand why the obvious solution, that is, put a button into the
popup notification, would not work well. I either can't understand why
the most hated solution
@Matthew, the complaint isn't about an inability to update the
reportedly out of data packages at the time of a crash. That's of
little use. The complaint is instead that there were updates the system
knew about prior to the crash but didn't notify me about, as expected
based on previous and pref
The problem with crash reports in out-of-date packages is bug 340970.
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubu
I can't agree more with the sentiment of those that want the old
functionality back. Security update or no, I don't want to wait a week
to be notified and then be either notified by an abrupt "in your face"
pop over or a "you'll never see me" pop under.
Since starting to test Jaunty I've repeated
What a horrible change. I just accustomed my mom to looking at the
notification area for a red arrow (update now) or an orange starburst.
And now she needs to either manually open the window and check for
updates, or be interrupted in the middle of her work for them? What
happened to "let the user
That is one of the features that I liked about Ubuntu. When a security
update became available the little red arrow icon would appear on the
top taksbar. I then had the option to open the Updater and see what was
available and then decide if I wanted to do it or not. I also had the
option to make i
This is a case where I actually agree with the philosophy of "if it
ain't broke, don't fix it."
Perhaps the logical progression would have been to make the update
notifier configurable in a way that could be configured to do it the
"old" way instead of changing it without an easy way to change it
Intrepid update notifier was fine. An applet appeared on the top line,
I could attend to it at an appropriate time.
I certainly don't want a drop down window interrupting what I'm doing.
Since I'm running alpha jaunty much of the time when I boot up I invoke
update manager and then do a check.
I also want to vote for the free choice.
I support innovations but please also keep an option for the more
conservatives. ;-)
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which i
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 23:06 +, Steve Jackson wrote:
> I echo what riban said. I'm likely to just disable the update-notifier
> altogether rather than risk having ugly pop-unders (and maybe pop-overs
> by mistake) happening in the middle of a presentation. Losing the
> existing 'gentle' mechanis
I will quote:
I was wondering why I wasn't notified of updates... no update-notifier?! that
sucks!!! :-S
*I want my notifier back* and I really don't care about libnotify popups (tough
was good)... a icon it's fine by me please :-D
Can I get an option to have the icon show up if I want? Ev
I echo what riban said. I'm likely to just disable the update-notifier
altogether rather than risk having ugly pop-unders (and maybe pop-overs
by mistake) happening in the middle of a presentation. Losing the
existing 'gentle' mechanism for persistent reminders in favour of a
'bullying' one is a wo
The update notifier icon (as implemented in Intrepid) is fantastic. It
is clear and obvious and no one I know has been confused by it. It is
only there when it needs to be. The user can decide what to do about the
notification of updates. I am pretty computer savvy but relatives and
friends that I
I really cannot say that I'm in favor of the way this is projected, but I find
myself in most agreement with the points that:
1) this should be adjustable, and
2) that there needs to be a more persistant way of notifying for needed reboots
and updates not attended to (most especially security upd
I also like the Ideas behind the new notification system and I love the
idea of cleaning up the notification area, but does this mean
notification area is deprecated?
Agreed, there are far too many applications abusing these icons by
presenting completely irrelevant icons. Mainly applications stat
** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu)
Importance: Wishlist => High
Status: New => Confirmed
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
@Brian the bug here is the removal of Update-Notifier.
It can be set on gconf (not as discoverable as wished)
But this bug introduces a few ones like Cooke mention: no control of the
popup/popunder, no notification of reboot
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.
Brian J. Murrell, the problem with Update Manager appearing in front of
everything else is bug 333284.
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Brian:
Yes, I think that's the main problem. According the spec, update-manager
should be a morphing window by the time this piece of work is
"finished", right? That will solve pretty much all of the problems
relating to it becoming a pop-up, I believe. I expect we'll end up
needing to file a few
It may be a better idea to give the user some sort of control over when
the pop-up will occur. That way, those who want the defaults (1 day for
security, 5 days for some others, etc...) will be able to leave it like
that, and the rest of us will be able to get the minute-by-minute
notifications we
So what I am understanding from everyone, is that they don't mind the
pop-up BUT the fact that theres no after-reminder and/or after icon to
let them know updates are available is the regression/issue? If this is
the case then, i will switch it off of wishlist. There is a fine line
between a regr
@Dana: that would be another bug (please file a new bug report, if one
doesn't exist yet).
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-
Another thing I've noticed: this auto-launching update manager doesn't even
achive its stated purpose of having people install updates:
Just yesterday, I booted a drive I hadn't booted in 5 weeks and
update-manager, of course, auto-launched
The only problem: it didn't update the PACKAGE C
On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 22:35 +, Jan Claeys wrote:
> According to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Importance "Wishlist" should
> be used for "a request to add a new feature to one of the programs in
> Ubuntu".
>
> This bug is about a regression, not about a new feature.
I absolutely agree that thi
According to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Importance "Wishlist" should
be used for "a request to add a new feature to one of the programs in
Ubuntu".
This bug is about a regression, not about a new feature.
(I personally think it should be marked at least "Medium", as it impacts
a core applicatio
Although I understand the high importance of this bug, this is really a
wishlist bug as the removal of update notifier is what has been planned
and you are requesting that it be reversed.
** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu)
Importance: High => Wishlist
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifi
I was wondering why I wasn't notified of updates... no update-notifier?! that
sucks!!! :-S
*I want my notifier back* and I really don't care about libnotify popups (tough
was good)... a icon it's fine by me please :-D
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.ne
I don't get it. How else am I being informed that updates are pending?
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
This is seriously annoying. I fully agree that the notification area
icon is just not obvious for most users, and I fully support popping up
update-manager once a week to grab the attention of those users who
haven't updated their system yet.
However, as someone who likes to install updates as soo
We need a method for notification of updates and we have a notification
area. I don't really understand the issue. I can agree applications
clutter the notification area but surely this is a real notification. I
ended up here as I want passive update notification and thought it was
broken.
--
[
since discussion on the devel ML tended to a possibility of having UN
back, i'm setting this to NEW.
** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => New
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification bec
As my previous comment may sound more aggressive than it is, let me
explain this a bit better. Quoting from above
"But seriously, we did not design this behavior yesterday on the back of
a napkin. We discussed it publicly at the Ubuntu Developer Summit in
December."
And quoting from the top
"Spe
"Instead, Update Manager should open automatically, unfocused and in the
background. (When opened manually, Update Manager should still open
focused and frontmost as usual.) "
So a pop-under is a solution for system upgrades? It seems to me rather
a way to emulate one of the most annoying web spam
Alan,
You like the new OSD? So do I. It is very nice, and that is not the
problem. But do you like the lack of a persistent notification for the
presence of a condition, and feel that launching the handling
application, in this case the update manager, is the correct solution?
The bug isn't th
** Tags added: dxteam notifications
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://
2009/2/24 Noel J. Bergman :
> Actually, I'm still trying to find anyone who likes the
> change.
You now found one. I like it. It's _unfinished_ and buggy (I have
reported a couple of bugs to help in that regard), but I like the
concept and look forward to it being finished and polished.
I realis
> Curses, our secret plan has been uncovered! Canonical is indeed trying to
> degrade Ubuntu,
> make it less secure, and drive average business and personal users away.
No one has said that there is any malicious intent. That's just a
defensive reaction on your part. But nor do we like the dire
@C. Cooke: that would need to be (at least) 24h for security updates, as
many people delay installing fixes until the beginning or end of a day,
to minimize the interruptions...
@Matthew Paul Thomas: one problem with the "popup update-manager" method
is that it is not persistent. If I close that
(bear with me on this one; I'm stuck at home ill, so this may be less
coherent than would be ideal)
I can think of a few use-cases where the new implementation may/will
cause problems as it's currently laid out:
Problems relating to the window being opened for you:
1) If it appears at the bottom
Curses, our secret plan has been uncovered! Canonical is indeed trying
to degrade Ubuntu, make it less secure, and drive average business and
personal users away. The orange star icon was a paragon of obviousness
and clickability, so it just had to go.
But seriously, we did not design this behavio
Also it goes against the idea you not being able to run 2+ apt/dpkg
sessions. Since it is opening for me during dist-upgrade (it may be
every 2 days but i do updates everyday so i dont notice if it happens
more so. I that idea it would not be possible for it to open let alone
run update as it is do
One thing people didnt notice or left out of bug. It only happens when
using dist-upgrade interminal upgrade doesnt trigger u-d to open.
--
[Jaunty] Removal of Update Notifier is WRONG
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/332945
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bug
Further reading for people:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/
which links to:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotificationDesignGuidelines
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotifyOSD
And I do like the new OSD. I just disagree with removing the presence
of a notification icon, which is a persistent notice o
I am confirming this bug report. I too feel that removing the update-
notifier is more a move in the direction of degrading Ubuntu. At least
with the update-notifier-icon, I made the decision to install the
updates. If the update-manager simply opens, I will have to continue
with the work I am doin
76 matches
Mail list logo
