| 2010-05-10 01:04:58 |
John King |
bug |
|
|
added bug |
| 2010-05-10 01:55:16 |
Murat Gunes |
hundredpapercuts: status |
New |
Invalid |
|
| 2010-05-24 11:58:58 |
Nicholas Christian Langkjær Ipsen |
bug task added |
|
ubuntu |
|
| 2010-05-24 11:59:45 |
Nicholas Christian Langkjær Ipsen |
nominated for series |
|
Ubuntu Lucid |
|
| 2010-05-24 11:59:45 |
Nicholas Christian Langkjær Ipsen |
nominated for series |
|
Ubuntu Maverick |
|
| 2010-05-31 10:27:34 |
Vish |
affects |
hundredpapercuts |
software-center |
|
| 2010-05-31 10:27:34 |
Vish |
software-center: status |
Invalid |
New |
|
| 2010-05-31 10:27:57 |
Vish |
affects |
ubuntu |
software-center (Ubuntu) |
|
| 2010-05-31 10:27:57 |
Vish |
software-center (Ubuntu): importance |
Undecided |
Wishlist |
|
| 2010-06-01 14:42:57 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center: status |
New |
Invalid |
|
| 2010-06-01 14:51:48 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): importance |
Wishlist |
High |
|
| 2010-06-01 14:51:48 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
New |
Triaged |
|
| 2010-06-01 14:51:48 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): assignee |
|
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) |
|
| 2010-06-01 14:54:50 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
summary |
It's easier and safer to install the newest versions of popular open source software on Windows than on Ubuntu. (Or, why it's high time Ubuntu made upgrading to stable versions of software easier and safer) |
Upgrading packaged Ubuntu application unreasonably involves upgrading entire OS |
|
| 2010-06-01 14:55:07 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
bug task added |
|
soyuz |
|
| 2010-06-08 11:05:13 |
Julian Edwards |
soyuz: status |
New |
Invalid |
|
| 2010-06-20 13:45:33 |
Luke Jennings |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Luke Jennings |
| 2010-09-11 12:37:16 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
Triaged |
In Progress |
|
| 2010-09-11 12:37:16 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): assignee |
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) |
Rick Spencer (rick-rickspencer3) |
|
| 2010-09-12 23:33:16 |
Rick Spencer |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
In Progress |
Opinion |
|
| 2010-09-12 23:34:04 |
Rick Spencer |
software-center (Ubuntu): assignee |
Rick Spencer (rick-rickspencer3) |
|
|
| 2010-09-12 23:34:10 |
Rick Spencer |
software-center (Ubuntu): importance |
High |
Undecided |
|
| 2010-10-14 11:39:30 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
Opinion |
In Progress |
|
| 2010-10-14 11:39:32 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): assignee |
|
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) |
|
| 2011-06-23 20:42:51 |
Robert Collins |
affects |
launchpad |
null |
|
| 2011-07-25 13:35:24 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
description |
It's hard to imagine that this could be true, but it is easier to upgrade to the newest stable versions of popular free and open source software (referred to from here on as FOSS) in proprietary operating systems, than it is to do so on Ubuntu. I will use Firefox, a popular bit of FOSS on all platforms, as an example during this bug report.
Steps to repeat:
1. Wait for a new version of Firefox to come out, or flash back with me to the launch of Firefox 3.6.
What happens:
2. Observe that an installer is available for the newest stable version on http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/personal.html for Windows. If you have Windows, or know someone who will let you use their Windows PC, then download and run the installer.
3. You should observe that if an older version of Firefox exists on the system, the installer should import from and replace that version with little need for effort from the user.
4. Observe that nowhere in the Ubuntu Software Center, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version of Firefox from a trusted source. Observe that Mozilla does not package Firefox as a *.deb available from the aforementioned page, but instead as a *.tar.bz2, which a new user will likely not know what to do with.
5. There is no installer available from the main site that automates the installation and replacement process, the download is just a precompiled binary with the miscellaneous other files and dependencies it needs. The USC doesn't provide this either. Users learn that they shouldn't download from outside trusted repositories or websites as a rule, and it's very true that choosing to install applications from outside trusted places poses a risk to the system. PPAs often provide unstable, development releases which may not run well on the system they're installed on, or pose security risks to the system. GetDeb.net is a reasonably trustable source for now, but a new user may not know about it, and it still may not provide the same level of trust that an Ubuntu sanctioned source would to the user. But if nothing else, GetDeb could be configured as a source for new, stable yet unsupported versions of software and be advertised as such somewhere in the default Ubuntu install.
What should happen:
1. The user should run the Ubuntu Software Center or Update Manager and be told that he/she has the option to replace the current version of Firefox with a newer, but potentially unsupported version, packaged for Ubuntu. USC should then connect to an 'upgrades repository' and go about installing/upgrading Firefox using the new version found there.
WHY THIS SHOULD HAPPEN:
A rolling release, or semi-rolling release system has been suggested in the past and almost always is shot down for various reasons. I don't believe the way I'm suggesting this would constitute a rolling release system, and I don't think it would require any large change to the way things are done now. Ultimately, it would be up to the devs to implement this idea in whatever way they wished if they so chose, but here's why I think the USC should provide the ability to upgrade software easily and safely:
-Software development stops for no operating system, and Windows users are used to having the newest versions of software as soon as, or soon after they come out. Being able to upgrade easily to newer versions of software, is a rather reasonable expectation of a modern, mainstream operating system.
-Resources wouldn't be stretched too thin; software would be upgraded to their newest stable version under the stipulation that regardless of their former status of support (main or universe), they may or will be completely unsupported after upgrade. It's better than or at least equal to the alternative; using potentially malicious or unstable untrusted software from unofficial sources.
-Doesn't it seem wrong that it's easier to have the newest versions of FOSS software on proprietary operating systems than on a largely FOSS one? Ubuntu should showcase the best and newest of what FOSS has to offer, not so much or in a way that makes it look like a Debian-based Fedora, but in a way that if the user wants it, he can get it easily. Sure, you could reasonably argue that if the user cares so much about new software, he/she could go to a distro like Fedora or a rolling release distro, but that'd be kinda like Windows telling it's users that if they want the newest version of say, Windows Media Player (bear with me here xD) they have to upgrade their entire OS to an unstable development release. Ubuntu should be able to offer new versions of software easily, but it doesn't mean that all the core system libraries and daemons have to be upgraded. Simply an option for (at least) commonly used software.
I hope I was able to present my point in a valid and clear way; if I was unable to, please ask me to elaborate. I'd really like to see something resembling this idea be implemented in Maverick or Maverick+1. Thank you for your time. |
It's hard to imagine that this could be true, but it is easier to upgrade to the newest stable versions of popular free and open source software (referred to from here on as FOSS) in proprietary operating systems, than it is to do so on Ubuntu.
Two examples:
1. Wait for a new version of LibreOffice to be released.
What happens:
* <http://www.libreoffice.org/download/> offers downloadable versions for Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu and other systems.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
2. Wait for a new Hedgewars version to be released. (Or notice that you are unable to play network games, because the server requires a client version newer than the one packaged in Ubuntu.)
What happens:
* <http://hedgewars.org/download.html> links to an Ubuntu package, but this requires setting up an untrusted "Playdeb" channel.
* On Mac OS X, the new version is advertised by a badge on the App Store icon, and can be installed in a couple of clicks.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
Users learn that they shouldn't download from outside trusted repositories or websites as a rule, and it's very true that choosing to install applications from outside trusted places poses a risk to the system. PPAs often provide unstable, development releases which may not run well on the system they're installed on, or pose security risks to the system. GetDeb.net is a reasonably trustable source for now, but a new user may not know about it, and it still may not provide the same level of trust that an Ubuntu sanctioned source would to the user. But if nothing else, GetDeb could be configured as a source for new, stable yet unsupported versions of software and be advertised as such somewhere in the default Ubuntu install.
What should happen:
* On running Ubuntu Software Center or Update Manager, you should be told that you have the option to replace the current version with a newer version.
WHY THIS SHOULD HAPPEN:
A rolling release, or semi-rolling release system has been suggested in the past and almost always is shot down for various reasons. I don't believe the way I'm suggesting this would constitute a rolling release system, and I don't think it would require any large change to the way things are done now. Ultimately, it would be up to the devs to implement this idea in whatever way they wished if they so chose, but here's why I think the USC should provide the ability to upgrade software easily and safely:
-Software development stops for no operating system, and Windows users are used to having the newest versions of software as soon as, or soon after they come out. Being able to upgrade easily to newer versions of software, is a rather reasonable expectation of a modern, mainstream operating system.
-Resources wouldn't be stretched too thin; software would be upgraded to their newest stable version under the stipulation that regardless of their former status of support (main or universe), they may or will be completely unsupported after upgrade. It's better than or at least equal to the alternative; using potentially malicious or unstable untrusted software from unofficial sources.
-Doesn't it seem wrong that it's easier to have the newest versions of FOSS software on proprietary operating systems than on a largely FOSS one? Ubuntu should showcase the best and newest of what FOSS has to offer, not so much or in a way that makes it look like a Debian-based Fedora, but in a way that if the user wants it, he can get it easily. Sure, you could reasonably argue that if the user cares so much about new software, he/she could go to a distro like Fedora or a rolling release distro, but that'd be kinda like Windows telling it's users that if they want the newest version of say, Windows Media Player (bear with me here xD) they have to upgrade their entire OS to an unstable development release. Ubuntu should be able to offer new versions of software easily, but it doesn't mean that all the core system libraries and daemons have to be upgraded. Simply an option for (at least) commonly used software.
------------
Latest progress:
* <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-o-backports-ui> (for software in the Ubuntu archive)
* <http://voices.canonical.com/isd/?p=167> (for software not in the Ubuntu archive) |
|
| 2011-07-25 13:35:27 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): importance |
Undecided |
High |
|
| 2011-09-03 20:36:44 |
Arnout De Maré |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Arnout De Maré |
| 2011-09-16 11:57:28 |
manny |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber manny |
| 2011-09-21 18:09:57 |
Darik Horn |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Darik Horn |
| 2011-09-27 05:13:30 |
Dylan McCall |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Dylan McCall |
| 2011-09-27 10:22:22 |
Zygmunt Krynicki |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Zygmunt Krynicki |
| 2011-09-27 18:20:48 |
Michael Martin-Smucker |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Michael Martin-Smucker |
| 2011-09-29 16:20:49 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
description |
It's hard to imagine that this could be true, but it is easier to upgrade to the newest stable versions of popular free and open source software (referred to from here on as FOSS) in proprietary operating systems, than it is to do so on Ubuntu.
Two examples:
1. Wait for a new version of LibreOffice to be released.
What happens:
* <http://www.libreoffice.org/download/> offers downloadable versions for Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu and other systems.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
2. Wait for a new Hedgewars version to be released. (Or notice that you are unable to play network games, because the server requires a client version newer than the one packaged in Ubuntu.)
What happens:
* <http://hedgewars.org/download.html> links to an Ubuntu package, but this requires setting up an untrusted "Playdeb" channel.
* On Mac OS X, the new version is advertised by a badge on the App Store icon, and can be installed in a couple of clicks.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
Users learn that they shouldn't download from outside trusted repositories or websites as a rule, and it's very true that choosing to install applications from outside trusted places poses a risk to the system. PPAs often provide unstable, development releases which may not run well on the system they're installed on, or pose security risks to the system. GetDeb.net is a reasonably trustable source for now, but a new user may not know about it, and it still may not provide the same level of trust that an Ubuntu sanctioned source would to the user. But if nothing else, GetDeb could be configured as a source for new, stable yet unsupported versions of software and be advertised as such somewhere in the default Ubuntu install.
What should happen:
* On running Ubuntu Software Center or Update Manager, you should be told that you have the option to replace the current version with a newer version.
WHY THIS SHOULD HAPPEN:
A rolling release, or semi-rolling release system has been suggested in the past and almost always is shot down for various reasons. I don't believe the way I'm suggesting this would constitute a rolling release system, and I don't think it would require any large change to the way things are done now. Ultimately, it would be up to the devs to implement this idea in whatever way they wished if they so chose, but here's why I think the USC should provide the ability to upgrade software easily and safely:
-Software development stops for no operating system, and Windows users are used to having the newest versions of software as soon as, or soon after they come out. Being able to upgrade easily to newer versions of software, is a rather reasonable expectation of a modern, mainstream operating system.
-Resources wouldn't be stretched too thin; software would be upgraded to their newest stable version under the stipulation that regardless of their former status of support (main or universe), they may or will be completely unsupported after upgrade. It's better than or at least equal to the alternative; using potentially malicious or unstable untrusted software from unofficial sources.
-Doesn't it seem wrong that it's easier to have the newest versions of FOSS software on proprietary operating systems than on a largely FOSS one? Ubuntu should showcase the best and newest of what FOSS has to offer, not so much or in a way that makes it look like a Debian-based Fedora, but in a way that if the user wants it, he can get it easily. Sure, you could reasonably argue that if the user cares so much about new software, he/she could go to a distro like Fedora or a rolling release distro, but that'd be kinda like Windows telling it's users that if they want the newest version of say, Windows Media Player (bear with me here xD) they have to upgrade their entire OS to an unstable development release. Ubuntu should be able to offer new versions of software easily, but it doesn't mean that all the core system libraries and daemons have to be upgraded. Simply an option for (at least) commonly used software.
------------
Latest progress:
* <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-o-backports-ui> (for software in the Ubuntu archive)
* <http://voices.canonical.com/isd/?p=167> (for software not in the Ubuntu archive) |
It is easier to upgrade to the newest stable versions of most applications -- even open source applications -- on a proprietary operating system than it is on Ubuntu.
Two examples:
1. Wait for a new version of LibreOffice to be released.
What happens:
* <http://www.libreoffice.org/download/> offers downloadable versions for Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu and other systems.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
2. Wait for a new Hedgewars version to be released. (Or notice that you are unable to play network games, because the server requires a client version newer than the one packaged in Ubuntu.)
What happens:
* <http://hedgewars.org/download.html> links to an Ubuntu package, but this requires setting up an untrusted "Playdeb" channel.
* On Mac OS X, the new version is advertised by a badge on the App Store icon, and can be installed in a couple of clicks.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
Users learn that they shouldn't download from outside trusted repositories or websites as a rule, and it's very true that choosing to install applications from outside trusted places poses a risk to the system. PPAs often provide unstable, development releases which may not run well on the system they're installed on, or pose security risks to the system. GetDeb.net is a reasonably trustable source for now, but a new user may not know about it, and it still may not provide the same level of trust that an Ubuntu sanctioned source would to the user. But if nothing else, GetDeb could be configured as a source for new, stable yet unsupported versions of software and be advertised as such somewhere in the default Ubuntu install.
What should happen:
* On running Ubuntu Software Center or Update Manager, you should be told that you have the option to replace the current version with a newer version.
WHY THIS SHOULD HAPPEN:
A rolling release, or semi-rolling release system has been suggested in the past and almost always is shot down for various reasons. I don't believe the way I'm suggesting this would constitute a rolling release system, and I don't think it would require any large change to the way things are done now. Ultimately, it would be up to the devs to implement this idea in whatever way they wished if they so chose, but here's why I think the USC should provide the ability to upgrade software easily and safely:
-Software development stops for no operating system, and Windows users are used to having the newest versions of software as soon as, or soon after they come out. Being able to upgrade easily to newer versions of software, is a rather reasonable expectation of a modern, mainstream operating system.
-Resources wouldn't be stretched too thin; software would be upgraded to their newest stable version under the stipulation that regardless of their former status of support (main or universe), they may or will be completely unsupported after upgrade. It's better than or at least equal to the alternative; using potentially malicious or unstable untrusted software from unofficial sources.
-Doesn't it seem wrong that it's easier to have the newest versions of FOSS software on proprietary operating systems than on a largely FOSS one? Ubuntu should showcase the best and newest of what FOSS has to offer, not so much or in a way that makes it look like a Debian-based Fedora, but in a way that if the user wants it, he can get it easily. Sure, you could reasonably argue that if the user cares so much about new software, he/she could go to a distro like Fedora or a rolling release distro, but that'd be kinda like Windows telling it's users that if they want the newest version of say, Windows Media Player (bear with me here xD) they have to upgrade their entire OS to an unstable development release. Ubuntu should be able to offer new versions of software easily, but it doesn't mean that all the core system libraries and daemons have to be upgraded. Simply an option for (at least) commonly used software.
------------
Latest progress:
* <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-o-backports-ui> (for software in the Ubuntu archive)
* <https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/> (for software not in the Ubuntu archive)
This bug will be marked as Fixed when at least 50% of Ubuntu applications can be updated to a new version without upgrading the operating system. |
|
| 2011-10-04 10:18:37 |
John Mills |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber John Mills |
| 2011-10-09 18:55:17 |
iGadget |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Matthijs ten Kate |
| 2011-10-09 20:44:50 |
Stephen Brandt |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Stephen Brandt |
| 2011-10-10 18:03:48 |
Michael Spall |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Michael Spall |
| 2011-10-11 01:03:38 |
Rae Andrea Moses |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Rae Andrea Moses |
| 2011-10-16 15:57:10 |
Rolf Leggewie |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Rolf Leggewie |
| 2011-10-23 23:48:27 |
Michelle Walker |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Michelle Walker |
| 2011-12-16 16:48:37 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
bug task deleted |
null |
|
|
| 2011-12-16 16:48:41 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
bug task deleted |
software-center |
|
|
| 2012-01-05 11:20:14 |
Adolfo Jayme Barrientos |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Fitoschido |
| 2012-01-21 15:28:08 |
Marius B. Kotsbak |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Marius Kotsbak |
| 2012-01-30 21:48:33 |
Bjørn Erik Bismo |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
In Progress |
Fix Committed |
|
| 2012-02-06 12:01:02 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
Fix Committed |
In Progress |
|
| 2012-03-17 23:17:51 |
Jiri Grönroos |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Jiri Grönroos |
| 2012-03-22 02:50:39 |
Michelle Walker |
removed subscriber Michelle Walker |
|
|
|
| 2012-04-10 12:07:19 |
Gao Shichao |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber xgdgsc |
| 2012-04-17 18:45:59 |
Dave Morley |
tags |
lp-soyuz |
ca-escalate lp-soyuz |
|
| 2012-04-17 18:47:57 |
Dave Morley |
tags |
ca-escalate lp-soyuz |
ca-escalated lp-soyuz |
|
| 2012-05-21 14:16:44 |
Michael Vogt |
tags |
ca-escalated lp-soyuz |
lp-soyuz |
|
| 2012-05-21 14:17:47 |
David Pitkin |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
In Progress |
Won't Fix |
|
| 2012-05-21 14:19:07 |
David Pitkin |
software-center (Ubuntu): status |
Won't Fix |
In Progress |
|
| 2012-07-15 19:29:55 |
Grzegorz G. |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Grzegorz G. |
| 2012-08-26 10:51:41 |
Alexander Kallenbach |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Alexander Kallenbach |
| 2012-08-26 22:46:03 |
S. Christian Collins |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber S. Christian Collins |
| 2012-08-30 16:42:41 |
Felix |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Felix |
| 2012-08-31 07:13:32 |
Edward Donovan |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Edward Donovan |
| 2012-08-31 13:43:55 |
Benjamin Heil |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Benjamin Heil |
| 2012-09-01 10:24:23 |
Tormod Hellen |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Tormod Hellen |
| 2012-09-01 12:29:23 |
BenX |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber BenX |
| 2012-09-03 17:20:38 |
Ravi Kumar |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Ravi Kumar |
| 2012-09-05 15:59:56 |
Matthew Paul Thomas |
description |
It is easier to upgrade to the newest stable versions of most applications -- even open source applications -- on a proprietary operating system than it is on Ubuntu.
Two examples:
1. Wait for a new version of LibreOffice to be released.
What happens:
* <http://www.libreoffice.org/download/> offers downloadable versions for Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu and other systems.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
2. Wait for a new Hedgewars version to be released. (Or notice that you are unable to play network games, because the server requires a client version newer than the one packaged in Ubuntu.)
What happens:
* <http://hedgewars.org/download.html> links to an Ubuntu package, but this requires setting up an untrusted "Playdeb" channel.
* On Mac OS X, the new version is advertised by a badge on the App Store icon, and can be installed in a couple of clicks.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
Users learn that they shouldn't download from outside trusted repositories or websites as a rule, and it's very true that choosing to install applications from outside trusted places poses a risk to the system. PPAs often provide unstable, development releases which may not run well on the system they're installed on, or pose security risks to the system. GetDeb.net is a reasonably trustable source for now, but a new user may not know about it, and it still may not provide the same level of trust that an Ubuntu sanctioned source would to the user. But if nothing else, GetDeb could be configured as a source for new, stable yet unsupported versions of software and be advertised as such somewhere in the default Ubuntu install.
What should happen:
* On running Ubuntu Software Center or Update Manager, you should be told that you have the option to replace the current version with a newer version.
WHY THIS SHOULD HAPPEN:
A rolling release, or semi-rolling release system has been suggested in the past and almost always is shot down for various reasons. I don't believe the way I'm suggesting this would constitute a rolling release system, and I don't think it would require any large change to the way things are done now. Ultimately, it would be up to the devs to implement this idea in whatever way they wished if they so chose, but here's why I think the USC should provide the ability to upgrade software easily and safely:
-Software development stops for no operating system, and Windows users are used to having the newest versions of software as soon as, or soon after they come out. Being able to upgrade easily to newer versions of software, is a rather reasonable expectation of a modern, mainstream operating system.
-Resources wouldn't be stretched too thin; software would be upgraded to their newest stable version under the stipulation that regardless of their former status of support (main or universe), they may or will be completely unsupported after upgrade. It's better than or at least equal to the alternative; using potentially malicious or unstable untrusted software from unofficial sources.
-Doesn't it seem wrong that it's easier to have the newest versions of FOSS software on proprietary operating systems than on a largely FOSS one? Ubuntu should showcase the best and newest of what FOSS has to offer, not so much or in a way that makes it look like a Debian-based Fedora, but in a way that if the user wants it, he can get it easily. Sure, you could reasonably argue that if the user cares so much about new software, he/she could go to a distro like Fedora or a rolling release distro, but that'd be kinda like Windows telling it's users that if they want the newest version of say, Windows Media Player (bear with me here xD) they have to upgrade their entire OS to an unstable development release. Ubuntu should be able to offer new versions of software easily, but it doesn't mean that all the core system libraries and daemons have to be upgraded. Simply an option for (at least) commonly used software.
------------
Latest progress:
* <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-o-backports-ui> (for software in the Ubuntu archive)
* <https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/> (for software not in the Ubuntu archive)
This bug will be marked as Fixed when at least 50% of Ubuntu applications can be updated to a new version without upgrading the operating system. |
It is easier to upgrade to the newest stable versions of most applications -- even open source applications -- on a proprietary operating system than it is on Ubuntu.
Two examples:
1. Wait for a new version of LibreOffice to be released.
What happens:
* <http://www.libreoffice.org/download/> offers downloadable versions for Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu and other systems.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
2. Wait for a new Hedgewars version to be released. (Or notice that you are unable to play network games, because the server requires a client version newer than the one packaged in Ubuntu.)
What happens:
* <http://hedgewars.org/download.html> links to an Ubuntu package, but this requires setting up an untrusted "Playdeb" channel.
* On Mac OS X, the new version is advertised by a badge on the App Store icon, and can be installed in a couple of clicks.
* However, nothing in Ubuntu Software Center, Update Manager, or anywhere in the default system, allows you to install the newest version in a trusted way.
Users learn that they shouldn't download from outside trusted repositories or websites as a rule, and it's very true that choosing to install applications from outside trusted places poses a risk to the system. PPAs often provide unstable, development releases which may not run well on the system they're installed on, or pose security risks to the system. GetDeb.net is a reasonably trustable source for now, but a new user may not know about it, and it still may not provide the same level of trust that an Ubuntu sanctioned source would to the user. But if nothing else, GetDeb could be configured as a source for new, stable yet unsupported versions of software and be advertised as such somewhere in the default Ubuntu install.
What should happen:
* On running Ubuntu Software Center or Update Manager, you should be told that you have the option to replace the current version with a newer version.
WHY THIS SHOULD HAPPEN:
A rolling release, or semi-rolling release system has been suggested in the past and almost always is shot down for various reasons. I don't believe the way I'm suggesting this would constitute a rolling release system, and I don't think it would require any large change to the way things are done now. Ultimately, it would be up to the devs to implement this idea in whatever way they wished if they so chose, but here's why I think the USC should provide the ability to upgrade software easily and safely:
-Software development stops for no operating system, and Windows users are used to having the newest versions of software as soon as, or soon after they come out. Being able to upgrade easily to newer versions of software, is a rather reasonable expectation of a modern, mainstream operating system.
-Resources wouldn't be stretched too thin; software would be upgraded to their newest stable version under the stipulation that regardless of their former status of support (main or universe), they may or will be completely unsupported after upgrade. It's better than or at least equal to the alternative; using potentially malicious or unstable untrusted software from unofficial sources.
-Doesn't it seem wrong that it's easier to have the newest versions of FOSS software on proprietary operating systems than on a largely FOSS one? Ubuntu should showcase the best and newest of what FOSS has to offer, not so much or in a way that makes it look like a Debian-based Fedora, but in a way that if the user wants it, he can get it easily. Sure, you could reasonably argue that if the user cares so much about new software, he/she could go to a distro like Fedora or a rolling release distro, but that'd be kinda like Windows telling it's users that if they want the newest version of say, Windows Media Player (bear with me here xD) they have to upgrade their entire OS to an unstable development release. Ubuntu should be able to offer new versions of software easily, but it doesn't mean that all the core system libraries and daemons have to be upgraded. Simply an option for (at least) commonly used software.
------------
Latest progress:
* For software in the Ubuntu archive:
<https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-o-backports-ui>
* For software not in the Ubuntu archive:
<https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppDevUploadProcess>
<https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/>
This bug will be marked as Fixed when at least 50% of Ubuntu applications can be updated to a new version without upgrading the operating system.
2012-09-05: 376 applications are published in MyApps and 36 in Extras. So over 10% of Ubuntu applications now be updated without upgrading the OS. |
|
| 2012-10-21 08:48:03 |
Andrea Corbellini |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Andrea Corbellini |
| 2013-05-09 16:54:12 |
probono |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber probono |
| 2013-06-18 16:31:41 |
Berend Garbade |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Berend Garbade |
| 2013-06-23 20:54:34 |
Debeet |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Debeet |
| 2013-09-26 01:30:16 |
Nick Thiemann |
software-center (Ubuntu): assignee |
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) |
Nick Thiemann (thiemann-nick) |
|
| 2013-09-26 01:36:45 |
Debeet |
removed subscriber Debeet |
|
|
|
| 2013-09-26 03:49:44 |
Adolfo Jayme Barrientos |
software-center (Ubuntu): assignee |
Nick Thiemann (thiemann-nick) |
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) |
|
| 2013-11-25 19:52:48 |
dobey |
affects |
software-center (Ubuntu) |
ubuntu |
|
| 2013-11-25 19:52:48 |
dobey |
ubuntu: status |
In Progress |
Opinion |
|
| 2013-11-25 19:52:48 |
dobey |
ubuntu: assignee |
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) |
|
|
| 2014-08-01 12:25:59 |
Markcortbass |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Mark |
| 2020-08-14 16:05:39 |
Eric |
bug |
|
|
added subscriber Eric |
