openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Poor user experience with update of extensions
Date Fri, 16 Aug 2013 07:34:13 GMT
On 8/15/13 9:10 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> 2013/8/15 Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org>
> 
>> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>>> On 15.08.2013 12:00, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>> I noticed a changed workflow compared to former days and I am redirected
>>>> now to the webpage where I can download the extension.
>>>>
>>> The update of an extension should work like the update of the extension
>>> "Watching Window" from 0.4.4 to 0.5.0. ...
>>> For the English dictionary I need to download manually the new
>>> extension. Then I need to install it manually.
>>>
>>
>> The exception here is "Watching Window", that uses custom updates. The
>> English dictionary behaves like virtually all other extensions. I give some
>> more details for those who are unfamiliar with the extensions packaging.
>>
>> Whoever packaged the English dictionary back in 2010 made the (right)
>> choice to leave to the Extensions site the responsibility to manage
>> updates. "Watching Window", instead, specifies its own update feed, that
>> lives on Github; but this is a more fragile setup; for example, I've seen
>> countless mentions of this problem (for the OxygenOffice gallery extension,
>> that specified its own update feed but then moved it...) over the years:
>> http://forum.openoffice.org/**en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=**31360<http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=31360>
>>
>> If you specify (and host) your own update feed, you can choose the update
>> policy (direct or indirect download); if you don't, the Extensions site
>> manages everything for you and you, as the extension maintainer, can't
>> choose between direct and indirect download.
>>
>> So what is under discussion here is not whether the 2010 maintainer of the
>> English dictionary made the right choice in relying on the generic update
>> feed (he did; otherwise I wouldn't have been able to republish his
>> extension and push updates), but is that the generic update feed on the
>> Extensions site is configured to serve updates as indirect downloads and
>> not as direct downloads.
>>
> 
> The indirect download approach could be used to communicate with end-users
> through the landing pages. May be this is something we might want to
> explore to outreach our user base.
> 

could be but I think it is not wanted in this specific context. The user
simply want the already installed and used extension get updated.

A useful enhancement to the whole managing of extensions is indeed the
possibility to browse extension online. That was planned from the
beginning but never realized because of some reasons that are no longer
relevant.

The same for templates, allow easy access to the online available
templates, allow to mark favorites, allow offline usage of them etc. And
most important make it configurable that it can be redirected to an
internal template or extension repository. Many companies want more
control about the things users can install or not

Taking such design into account from the beginning and everything is fine

Juergen




> Roberto
> 
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>>   Andrea.
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message