Comments on: GNOME PackageKit updates

By: Frank

Frank — Mon, 11 May 2009 16:16:24 +0000

For the love of all that is good….

Please RESET the “search type” to “Search by name” when the Add/Remove is restarted!!!!

I don’t know how many times that I am searching for a package/etc only to find out that nothing is showing up because I had set it to “Search by Description” or “Search by Filename” and forgot about it.

Resetting it to “Search by name” after Add/Remove is restarted is a workaround because the gui is not …how can i say… user friendly.

It should SCREAM to the user what/how he is searching. Maybe:

Search by [x] Name [] Description [] FileName
______________________________________
|Somepackagename |
|______________________________________|

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:23:59 +0000

Interesting idea. Regarding

“trivial: add a do-not-show-again checkbox on the mobile broadband nag screen”

I take it wireless means “mobile broadband” and not wifi connections. Perhaps the checkbox should be keyed to the particular connection? So you can “do not show this again for this network”?

By: Greg

Greg — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 17:08:34 +0000

Even though I’m in the U.S. and have never encountered a metered Internet connection, I like this change. It shows a level of polish and robustness that will give me a better feeling about the rest of the app. A few comments:

1) I think in the long run this should be handled lower down in the stack
2) The one post that suggested Network Manager handle this had some negative feedback along the lines with extra dependencies. There is no reason this has to be true. The lower level stack piece could be outside Network Manager and both could conditionally use this third piece.
3) Long long term it would be nice to see a web service that queries a community built database of net blocks that charge
4) Long long long term is would be nice to have a networking spec for querying this information directly from the provider via DNS or broadcast. But that would be 5+ year type stuff. It’s important because a lot of ISPs are looking at putting caps on bandwith so even though it’s low cost it isn’t free.

By: hughsie

hughsie — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 15:15:23 +0000

@Christoph: When you become my manager, you can rebuke me. Until that, please don’t. kthanksbye.

By: Christoph

Christoph — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:47:26 +0000

@Vide:
No, I’m not crying because the bug was closed. As I stated previously I do accept decisions very well. But if Richard says he has “loads of bugzillas” he should be able to show at least a single one. There were more then ten people complaining about the missing slider and nobody about the absolute sliders, but Richard doesn’t care. To me not listening to users and not replying to questions is arrogant, especially when somebody claims to know “what people wanted” (TM).

Time is no argument ether, because obviously Richards spends enough time on things that nobody really needs. Nobody expects a package manager to think for him but to do package management. Currently gnome-packagekit lacks very basic package management functions, but – hey! – it has fancy icons and warning dialogs.

And the criticism that I was only filing bugs is IMHO unjustified, because I do everything to debug problems, submit patches etc. Please take a look at the gnome-packagekit and gnome-power-manger bugs in Red Hat’s bugzilla.

BTW: After my last comments some bugs were changed from NEW to ASSIGNED. I feel sorry that it seems to need such strong words to make this happen.

By: hughsie

hughsie — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 08:01:21 +0000

@Diego: yes, just gnome-packagekit. PackageKit will remain on 0.4.x releases.

By: Diego

Diego — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 07:26:25 +0000

When you’re talking about 2.27 reversioning you’re referring only to the Gnome GUI, right?
It wouldn’t make much sense to me to reversion also PackageKit, it’s used also by KDE!

By: Vide

Vide — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 18:59:50 +0000

Sorry Cristoph but you’re just crying because your bug report #485846 was closed with a wontfix, and it was the right thing. Moreover Richard didn’t show any arrogance in the bug (no, I don’t consider “it makes me laugh” as arrogant).

That bug is just plain stupid (sorry for the word)

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:35:37 +0000

The main problem with guys from the desktop teams is always, that writing code and new features makes just more fun rather fixing the own already written ugly code so remove existing bugs. With respect to the maintainer of packagekit, but he unluckily doesn’t seem to be an exception.

By: Christoph

Christoph — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:57:14 +0000

@Richard: Less arrogance please. Remember, when I’m submitting bugs or patches, when I report my laptop’s keyboard events or when I’m defending you on devel-list, I’m doing all of this in my free time.