Add options to set the snappy refresh schedule

Bug #1770961 reported by Ads20000
54
This bug affects 12 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
software-properties (Ubuntu)
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

Snappy has a feature where the user can state when in a month to refresh (update) their snaps. Please provide options in Software & Updates to control this.

https://docs.snapcraft.io/system-options

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 18.04
Package: software-properties-gtk 0.96.24.32.1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 4.15.0-20.21-generic 4.15.17
Uname: Linux 4.15.0-20-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.20.9-0ubuntu7
Architecture: amd64
CurrentDesktop: communitheme:ubuntu:GNOME
Date: Sun May 13 15:10:07 2018
InstallationDate: Installed on 2017-08-03 (282 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 17.04 "Zesty Zapus" - Release amd64 (20170412)
PackageArchitecture: all
SourcePackage: software-properties
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to bionic on 2018-04-22 (21 days ago)

Revision history for this message
Ads20000 (ads20000) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

Changed in software-properties (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Nikolaos Perrakis (nikperrakis) wrote :

I 'd prefer it if software and updates functionality could be used to fully control how snaps update. For example if you can use the option to download updates and prompt the user to upgrade but don't do it until the user confirms it.

Revision history for this message
Ads20000 (ads20000) wrote :

'For example if you can use the option to download updates and prompt the user to upgrade but don't do it until the user confirms it.'

This is not a feature that snappy supports but I suppose Software & Updates could do this in a hacky way if it wanted to do so.

Ads20000 (ads20000)
description: updated
Revision history for this message
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

Thank you for your bug report, maybe you could post on https://forum.snapcraft.io/ about it? Snap related features are usually discussed there

Changed in software-properties (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Revision history for this message
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) wrote :

The snap-related feature is already implemented, and other issues concerning the settings GUI are tracked here, so I think this is the appropriate place for it.

Currently, my design for the update settings starts with a line of static text:

  Snap packages check for updates four times daily, downloading automatically.

  For other packages…

There I’m trying to convey that the “Check for updates automatically:” menu below applies to other packages, not snaps. <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwareUpdates#settings>

I intended that eventually, that line of text would become interactive — perhaps a menu, followed by another menu or timepickers depending on the setting, for example:

  Snap packages check for updates: [Every day:^] [4 times daily :^]

  Snap packages check for updates: [Weekdays :^] [between :^] [18:15] and [19:00]

  Snap packages check for updates: [Custom schedule (“fri5,23:00-01:00”) :^]

(It’s unfortunate that we need separate settings GUI for snap and deb updates at all — mainly because snap updates are fully automatic, while prompting for deb updates that often would be unpleasant. Perhaps we can combine *some* of the settings in future. But since snaps and debs have independent configuration under the hood, we’d still need to deal with cases where their equivalent settings are currently set to different values.)

Revision history for this message
Ads20000 (ads20000) wrote :

Another piece of documentation refers to all the options around snap refreshes: https://snapcraft.io/docs/keeping-snaps-up-to-date

These include holding refreshes when the connection is metered and manual holds (specific delay of an update exceptional to the usual refresh schedule set by the user).

Popey's video at https://youtu.be/gVZOBgTDJWc?t=514 is also helpful for understanding all the options now available for controlling snap updates.

Revision history for this message
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) wrote :

A revision of the label I mentioned above has now been implemented: “Snap package updates are checked routinely and installed automatically.”

In <https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/14542/57> I wrote: “Sometimes I design things in the hope that someone will implement them someday. I haven’t had time to do that with this dialog. But if anyone here is interested, a simple first step — useful and releasable by itself — would be to add a caption below the new label, of the form ‘Last check: Yesterday 16:27’. If someone submits a merge proposal to do that, then I’ll design the next bit.”

Revision history for this message
dee bee (o1bigtenor) wrote : Re: [Bug 1770961] Re: Add options to set the snappy refresh schedule

On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 12:35 PM Ads20000 <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Another piece of documentation refers to all the options around snap
> refreshes: https://snapcraft.io/docs/keeping-snaps-up-to-date
>
> These include holding refreshes when the connection is metered and
> manual holds (specific delay of an update exceptional to the usual
> refresh schedule set by the user).
>
> Popey's video at https://youtu.be/gVZOBgTDJWc?t=514 is also helpful for
> understanding all the options now available for controlling snap
> updates.
>

All the options but the most useful one - - - - - the OFF switch!

Revision history for this message
Ads20000 (ads20000) wrote :

dee bee if you want an off switch it's already been extensively discussed at https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/disabling-automatic-refresh-for-snap-from-store/707/

Please Like all the posts there that you agree with and provide SPECIFIC and preferably REAL use cases where an off switch is needed not just the ability to schedule updates for once a month and push them back another month as well as turn off automatic updates when on a metered connection. (Former?) snapd lead niemeyer requested specific use cases to demonstrate that an off switch is NEEDED. If you would like to put the work in, please read the thread in full and then provide what the developers are requesting on use cases and, if that's not possible, just Like all the posts you agree with. Thanks! :)

Revision history for this message
dee bee (o1bigtenor) wrote :

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 6:36 AM Ads20000 <email address hidden> wrote:

> dee bee if you want an off switch it's already been extensively
> discussed at https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/disabling-automatic-refresh-
> for-snap-from-store/707/
> <https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/disabling-automatic-refresh-for-snap-from-store/707/>
>
> Please Like all the posts there that you agree with and provide SPECIFIC
> and preferably REAL use cases where an off switch is needed not just the
> ability to schedule updates for once a month and push them back another
> month as well as turn off automatic updates when on a metered
> connection. (Former?) snapd lead niemeyer requested specific use cases
> to demonstrate that an off switch is NEEDED. If you would like to put
> the work in, please read the thread in full and then provide what the
> developers are requesting on use cases and, if that's not possible, just
> Like all the posts you agree with. Thanks! :)
>
> Greetings

As by at very least inference said 'lead' Niemeyer has made it very clear
that
there NEVER EVER WILL BE SUCH A SWITCH. So why would I waste
further time on this issue.

I had followed such thread from its inception and now only very
occasionally
mostly finding enjoyment at the ever more 'out there' reasons that are
proffered to validate the continuation that many have reviled. Many except
reasons were proffered and after about the first 100 such responses said
lead was downright surly if and when he responded to any further.

I can inform you that I had said miasma installed on a server. As I could
not
control the upgrade schedule I stopped using that particular system. After
a
time later when I assayed to restart the system it was not possible to do
that.
The system was locked into a perpetual loop which I could not break. I was
only able to break that loop by completely reinstalling the system. This
microsoft like control of behavior is something that I chose to reject many
many years ago when I was looking for an option that did not include
said companies then, and still today, software that specializes in porous
software.

Again - - - - - why would I waste time trying to convince someone who
hadn't been listening from the beginning of the argument that they were
not 'helping'. But then why would he or the team care - - - - this
procedure
is all about making more money on what is supposedly open source.

But then today's public is so enamoured of glitz and glitter than it just
doesn't understand that the is almost no privacy left and as far as
security - - - - why they think they don't need any - - - - - they trust
the
software companies. Sadly - - - - I do remember one of the slogans
that was bruted about when PCs were a newish thing - - - that is -
"Computing your way" implying and sometimes stating that the
previous rigidity in the corporate IT department had removed use to
the point where the user was never part of the equation. Somehow
it seems like we've come full circle - - - - we're back to where the IT
department, or software devs, are 'the only ones who know how things
should be done' - - - - except - - - - that was never true and is still
not true.

Regards

Revision history for this message
Ads20000 (ads20000) wrote :

To be fair, I think snappy devs also been open on that thread that if you need software that follows a 'not-Microsoft' and 'always trust the user' policy then yes you should not be using snap, use Flatpak or another alternative instead.

Revision history for this message
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

the bug here is probably the wrong place for those discussion, best to move to some user forum instead. It's worth mentioning that snapd has a configuration nowadays to respect limited connection and not waste data in such cases (which was something mentioned in earlier comments)

Revision history for this message
Ads20000 (ads20000) wrote :

Forum thread on this bug's feature request which includes Canonical employee Alan Pope including in their strawman proposal an 'off switch': https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/re-visiting-update-control-on-the-desktop/17170

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers