[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[p2-dev] difference between "Check for updates" and "Install new software"
- From: Andrew Eisenberg <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:04:30 -0700
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; b=v7UdqdqfPWQPwUW1sUFENMJTBNIdTsGF2KASQHNOX7kK7FDvEuzhLSdMOmdrtc21M2 TszeO5hepojmQtu6ls/pXOOnUqSp/8hZTtQxYIXdGIB6FG+ObcqVRVEcGJ4DkPyeNGNr fgsaG2UnrwhU+lxHPrWApQn+v/kLPlI21psf8=
I am encountering a problem with p2 and "check for updates". Before
raising a bug, I wanted to discuss to see if this really is a bug, or
just a "feature", and if there is any reasonable work around.
I have an update site with a base feature that includes several child
features. When someone installs the base feature only and then later
performs a "Check for updates", newer versions of the base feature and
child features will be found and installed no problem. However, when
a user installs the base feature and child features explicitly as
top-level features, check for updates will fail (even though install
new software will succeed).
I could just hide the child features (ie- mark them as "uncategoried")
and they will not appear in the update manager (unless "show
uncategorized features" is selected). The problem with this is that
some users legitimately want to install only one or more of the child
Another possibility is to add a warning in the description, something
like "Don't install child features X, Y, and Z if you are also
installing the parent feature. But, I doubt that most users would
follow the instructions (I know I never read the description box).
So, my question is: Is this a p2 bug? Or is it working as designed?
If it is not a bug, what is a reasonable workaround in this situation?