Auto update function

marmyshev

Most great software use an autoupdate system wich bring (download) and install new updates directly to user's computer.OLP just use a notification system. Update system will help to keep all users up to date really fast. And sometimes, update software uses an option like "update to beta-versions" what helps to test software faster and find bugs faster. Could anybody develop this good thing? :)

wogster

Auto update is only good for non-mission critical applications, OpenLP by it's very nature is mission critical, in that you don't want to get to church on Sunday morning and find it not working.  My installation on my computer at home gets the update as soon as it hits the Fedora repository.   This is because the fine folks at Fedora make sure it is compatible with Fedora, when they make up the RPM file.  The computer at church may not see that update until a week or so later, after I have made sure there are no issues with it and have had a chance to test it.   One update was a month later, another was skipped.  Once 2.0 is released, the church computer will probably not see anything more then bug fixes until 2.2 comes out.

marmyshev

Yes, agree with criticalness.But my idea - give to user choice what to do. All such systems do not anything without permission of user.It could work in sevral modes:1. Ask before download - most safe mode.2. Download automatically and ask for installation3. Download and install automaticallyAs an option "Download beta-versions" - would help for testers only.But now u need to open website, figureout wich link u should use, download and manually install new version - this makes user uncomfortable and takes some time too! Autoupdate system just helps u to skeep boring parts parts of this.

phill

Hi this has been discussed a little already. Please see the wishlist bug at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openlp/+bug/851171 Phill

gushie

I'm still not keen. I'm on the mailing list for a commerical worship software with automatic updates, and see a fair bit of grief if one of their releases has a fault and the user just blindly updated it without testing before the service.As soon as you offer a box asking the user to do something, they'll blindly click it without thinking about the consequences. Sometimes they don't even realise there might be consequences. Updating software that would impact a time of worship should be done with thought. Having the user have to go searching for it means they'll be more likely to do it when they have time to spare. In this scenario I'm a firm believer of a "If it aint broke, don't fix it". I'm one of the developers, and I only upgrade OpenLP at my own church if I see there has been a change that will benefit us in some way.

googol

Hello,I pretty much like the idea to of an auto downloader. The way I imagine this is:There is a dialog which informs you that you new version is available. I would just extend this dialog. Just offer the user to download the version. No, auto update function. Only ask if the user wants do download the new version.Though this might need to be discussed with the other devs.Regards

phill

Sorry, but as stated in the bug report I linked, I'm not a fan of this idea and agree with Gushie.

wogster

You also realize that this is only really needed for Windows (and possibly Mac) machines, I type this on a machine that runs Fedora (Linux), once a day a small application grabs a list of official updates (OpenLP is on that list), if there are security updates it tells me, so I can get them right away.  Otherwise I run a small application once a week, that shows me a list of all the updates that are waiting for me.  I can then select what software I want updates for, and it then goes out grabs the updates and installs them.  It's really quite slick and non-official software providers can use the same mechanism by adding another Internet site to the list of places to look for updates.  It's really quite slick....