Because the comment is only valid for the short period between when I perform an in-place upgrade and when I deign to re-enable said PPA's, which I typically do almost immediately. I'm generally no interested in keeping invalid comments in my sources, so I choose to remove the ammendments when I re-enable the PPAs. Which, as I've said is time consuming using software-properties-gtk (incidentally, why *do* comments show up in the PPA name field in software-properties-gtk?).
In any case, I could equally ask developers why they think it desirable or neccissary to add such comments to my sources. You've already made provisions to warn the end user *during* the in-place upgrade that their third-party PPA's will be disabled. Do you think the end user a fool? Regards, Lee. P.S. A related question: were I to have an unbroken chain of in-place upgrade from when I started using Ubuntu (which was Karmic), would my sources be littered with multiple 'disabled on upgrade to…' or just the one (i.e. do these comments of yours compound?). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1315342 Title: Stop appending 3rd party PPA names with warnings To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-release-upgrader/+bug/1315342/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
