Wouter Stomp wrote:
> Has it even been considered to automatically install updates, instead of
> confronting the user with a dialog they are not interested in only to
> push them into installing updates?
>
I believe auto-updating is available as an option. It would not be the
default.
Mark
--
Has it even been considered to automatically install updates, instead of
confronting the user with a dialog they are not interested in only to
push them into installing updates?
--
Do not launch in background
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/331054
You received this bug notification because you ar
Guys, the update-notifier will be opened when there are updates, BUT it
should do so quietly in the background, not grab the focus. So, if it's
grabbing the focus for you, please report that as a bug (and provide
details of your window manager).
Mark
--
Do not autolaunch
https://bugs.launchpad.
Again, the window should not appear on top of the window stack. If it
does, please report it as a bug.
** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
Do not autolaunch
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/331054
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
"the user should update his system as often as possible"
If that is the purpose, than it would be better to just have unattended-
upgrades (for security updates only of course) enabled by default and
don't bother the user with annoyances such as this.
** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu)
It just appeared with Metacity with the compositor switched on. I have
switched this off in gconf anyway, because I never use update-manager.
I think it is a mistake to show windows without them being specifically
requested, unless there is an error. This is also the case with the new
Evolution e-
Just to be clear, the window is not supposed to take focus when it
opens. If it does, please report that as a bug, including which window
manager you're using. Thanks!
--
Do not autolaunch
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/331054
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
The arguments stating:
* It is completely different to the past behaviour
* No other distribution does this
do not seem valid.
You cannot rule off the solution just because it's different to someone
else's/past solution.
The argument that
* It is very disruptive
is a valid critique, but the solut