[packagekit] Package update policy

Richard Hughes hughsient at gmail.com
Tue Sep 25 14:49:21 PDT 2007

On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 17:13 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
> Richard Hughes <hughsient at gmail.com> writes:
> > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 15:26 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
> >>  o Daily
> >>  o Weekly
> >>  o Never
> >
> > I really think weekly is too long, even for non-critical updates.
> Really?  I'm thinking plain jane, ordinary desktop users.  Do they
> really care if they wait a week for the latest firefox?  Do they even
> pay attention to what version they are running?  These are people who
> use their systems to browse the internets and do email I'm talking
> about.  Getting security updates out in a timely manner is important.
> Also, the people running mirrors will probably thank you for the
> 'weekly' option.

Hmm. Weekly just seems a very long time to me. I'll blog about it and
see what the consensus is.

> >>  [] Ask me before updating.
> >> -------------------------------
> >
> > Essential. Maybe hourly might also be an option?
> See my other email.  I really cannot imagine anyone wanting hourly
> package updates.  Sure, people who are really 'into' the latest and
> greatest can have the applet on their panel and click it.  I'm not
> talking about preventing them from getting updates...but...hourly
> automatic notification?

Sure, agree.

> /me remembers the rhn-applet 'throbber' that (for awhile) checked every
> 5 minutes or so.

Goodbye update mirrors... ;-)

> > Well, we can do this already with UpdatePackage as we can install
> > individual updates (which we get from the status of GetUpdates).
> Do any of the backends yet distinguish between 'security' updates and
> regular ones?

The yum metadata should really soon. I think APT is able to do this too


More information about the PackageKit mailing list