[packagekit] Display of update details in pk-update-viewer

[Richard Hughes]

On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 09:46 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> I think the way pk-update-viewer currently presents the update details
> is far from optimal. I like the pup approach to this much better, and
> have written a little patch to add a similar display to
> pk-update-viewer (it improves on pup by actually theming
> correctly...).
> 
> A screenshot can be seen here: http://people.redhat.com/mclasen/details.png

Yes, I think this is much better. I'm currently working on a new UI
similar to what davidz proposed, although I think it's best if we
"evolve" there rather than just doing a new code drop as we can discuss
bits as we go.

> As you can see, I've also moved the "Update package" button to the
> action area, where it imo belongs.

Agree.

> One thing I haven't done yet (and which is a little tricky) is to make
> the window resize when the expander is toggled to keep the package
> list from shrinking (one of Davids complaints).

Yes, I tried using an expander for this, but couldn't get it to work
correctly.

> if people think this is worth exploring further, I can provide a patch.

Please!!

> One thing that became clear while working on this is that PK doesn't
> currently provide adaequate information for
> updates. The yum metadata has more fields that are currently missing
> (some of them pretty essential, I think)
> 
> - update id (this would also be important to display in the
> transaction history, so that it is easy to check if a certain update
> has been installed)
> - title
> - issue date (this would be nice to include in the list so that the
> updates can be sorted by age)
> - bug and cve references including title and href

Well, we already support
http://www.packagekit.org/pk-reference.html#signal-update-detail

It's pretty easy to add new fields, it would take one of us a few
minutes at most.

A few questions:

* What exactly is update_id?
* What sort of output would be title?
* Issue date would be encoded with iso8601?
* The CVE url would be different to the update URL?

> It would be pretty nice if these fields could be (optionally) included
> in the update details provided by PK. Of course, you will have all
> kinds of fun funneling this through the single-line-of-ascii interface
> to the helpers...

Nahh, it's actually quite easy - any missing information is just omitted
but including the delimiter.

> One more thing that I noticed: the severity classification currently has
> low/normal/important/security. It would be nice if one could
> discriminate "bug-fix update" from "feature enhancement"
> somehow.

You mean have low/normal/important/security/bug-fix/enhancement?

If so, that seems sane to me. Comments welcome.

Richard.