[vlc-devel] 0.8.6d Release schedule

[Dennis van Amerongen]

> On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 13:26:53 +0100, Rémi Duraffort <ivoire at via.ecp.fr>
> wrote:
> >> My own opinion is that this whole system should be removed, and the
> user
> >> should just be warned that a new version is available, and download it
> >> himself.
> > The update system is really important for windows users because a lot of
> > them don't do any update if there isn't any advice. (I'm speaking about
> > "basics" users only)
> 
> So? I mean, it's their problem, not ours.
> 
> Besides, we now routinely loose the server for a few days every new
> releases. Do we really want to make the situation worse?
> 
> Remember we will be doing more and more binary releases as security fixes
> become more frequent. Also keep in mind that the development infra is on
> the same box, and SVN becomes outright unusable eveytime we release.
> 
> > And if we provide a system to warned about upload, we can provide the
> > download in the same time.
> 
> Arguable. VLC is not as good as real "download managers", especially, it
> cannot fragment the download, or use multiple servers.
> The main advantages of VLC are ease of use, and (if we ever do it)
> improved security.
> 

My vote definitely goes to the first proposal for Windows usage (Keep It Sweet & Simple).

This is perhaps still doable in 0.8.6:

1/ a manual update check from GUI that only gives a popup you are using latest version or that there is a new version available (and info on what's new) and asks if you want to go to the download page or not.

As future enhancement:

2/ option with automatic update check (which triggers the same popup as 1) and add option to disable the update check from the popup altogether as well

0: never check, 1: check on startup, 2: check weekly 3: check monthly

If this is enabled to weekly then users are informed relatively soon about a release.

Imho the current release cycles do not warrant the effort of having advanced download and install mechanisms that need to be maintained and kept secure (which was a reason to remove the current implementation).

- D