Okay, I posted this over at the Seti@Home forums, but the directed me over here, saying you'd be better equipped to assist in this.

I guess this is both an interface issue (auto-update would be handy for users and admins if implemented properly) and an API issue for the projects to use (so there's a common interface for all projects to issue automatic updates for their portion of the software)... Pardon the reposting.

----------

Original:

I'd still love to see online auto-update integrated into BOINC, where it'll go fetch and installed the latest appropriate version of BOINC. But, you could specify auto-update preferences by machine (client-end, I guess), in case you prefer to do your own builds based on the latest current, or if you want to keep a specific version because you know it runs stably (barring and REQUIRED upgrades to work properly with upgradedWU's in the future or what have you).

I just hink it would make keeping people up-to-date a whole lot simpler and then everyone could theoretically be on the same page, performance tweaks, better new processor timings / multi-core processor support and interface streamlining could be automatically propagated, etc. I mean why not build that into BOINC's download process? One could even modularize it to include certain uploads/downloads and exclude others.

* Download *
[ ] BOINC Client udates
[x] Seti@Home Updates
[x] Einstein@Home Updates
[ ] New Work Units
[x] Statistics
[ ] Etc.

* Upload *
[x] Results
[ ] Preferences (for account managers? like BAM or whatever)

That way folks could get only what they're looking for, updates [for BOINC and project-specific updates] could be propagated automatically, people can avoid getting work units if they're not wanting to potentially get overcommitted, people can just request stats updates without wasting bandwidth on their side or server side on other issues...

I think that would handily streamline the interface.

Right now there's only the one 'Update' button. Usually the first tiem you click it it tries to report and download new WU's (whici is annoying since I usually only want to get any new stats that were pending), after upload/download is complete, THEN it'll try for stats or whatever. It's just a weird interface to have one button do like 2-3 different things depending on the time of day and how recently you already pushed it. ;o)

Hmm, I guess the above examnple was two-fold... It would be nice of the 'update' button were replaced with more of a wizard-style interface for manual uploads/downloads.

And supplementing that it would be nice if there was a way to set auto-update preferences by machine so things automatically get downloaded when available and the machine has an open internet connection and the server isn't too busy...

Don't know if this was on the agenda or not. If so, sorry, didn't see it in my list of most currently posted stuff for this forum. If not, maybe an idea for future version so everyone can more easily get onto the same page in terms of client revisions, updates to specific projects for improved functionality, etc.

Cheers!



----------



Response to negative first response in clarification:

NO NOT GONNA HAPPEN! Sorry for the caps, I am NOT hsouting, I am "emphasing". The problem is too many people run Boinc on computers that are "critical" to their work. Berkeley has agreed to only auto update, and you can turn it off, the underlying Seti software. The Boinc software is manually updated ONLY and probably will be forever.
Would you want MS updating Windows for you? Oh it does you say, yes but from one version to another it doesn't. It updates only the underlying software, not the main program. MS will NOT auto upgrade from 98 to 2k to XP. And no you can't say because they want to make money, Linux does not do it either, and it IS free.

Hmm, alrighty, though I can see myriad flaws in the logic. Must challenge a few assertions (sorry it got wordy, I runneth over at the mouth sometimes).

I think I already said there should be an option to DISABLE auto-updates, so whoever installs it should be able to set it so it CAN'T update itself without permission (intended precisely to NOT disrupt critical systems with unauthorized updates). However the option should exist for those who WANT it (I'm guessing it's more than just me).

Secondly, Microsoft DOES issue patches for security and for usability. (HELLO!! XP SP2, anyone??) Critical updates can be and routinely ARE downloaded automatically for those who have it set up (they update and upgrade me weekly it seems, and I'm fine with it; XP is actually quite stable from an end users perspective [mine], I've never had a problem with auto-updates and they've never caused issues for me). And YES, there's an option (default option, as I recall) to NOT have it automatically updated, but only MANUALLY updated. This request is NO DIFFERENT from M$'s own policies.

Why can we not set up a system like M$'s? I mean right tyhere in the Automatic Updates control panel it says (Bottom to top) 1) Turn off Automatic Updates. 2) Notify me of, but do not automatically download, available updates. 3) Downloads updates automatically, but allow me to select whether/when to install updates. 4) Automatically download and apply critical updates. This actually seems like a logical way to do it. It gives the user or system admin choices of how to update (manually through varying degrees of automation).

Similarly, for a non M$ perspective/approach to the issue, Symantec's Live Update functionality works in much the same way. You log in you select what stuff you want it to look for, it tells you what's available, and if you want to you select what to download. User has complete control and is in charge of their own destiny.
Apple also has auto-update functionality for their OSX products (it's not just an M$ thing, everyone's doing it).

I'm not ostensibly asking for a complete redesign of the software every 5 months as your erroneous 95 -> 98 -> XP analogy seems to indicate (or similarly BOINC 3.01 -> 5.4). I'm asking for an in-version update patch scenario such as XP -> XP SP1 -> XP SP2 (Or BOINC 5.2.13 -> 5.4.9).

I'm not asking for XP to Longhorn update, just for any major usability patches. I mean whoever is GOING TO UPDATE their system is going to do it however they can, they'll go and download the latest update and install it manually. But for the casual user, why would you want to do that if there's an automatic version that does EXACTLY THE SAME THING AUTOMATICALLY (*cough* emphasis added *cough* sorry, must be having trouble controlling the volume of my characters *wink*). ;o]

Even if I was asking for XP->Longhorn (or the BOINC equivalent), so what? BOINC isn't in it for profits like M$, BOINC/Seti@Home/Folding@Home, etc. have a vested interest in keeping their users up-to-date and able to run the latest version of their software; frankly, as long as it worked seamlessly and all things still worked properly, I'd be all for seeing a free XP -> Longhorn update from M$; just 'cause they decide NOT to do it doesn't mean they SHOULDN'T do it if it was feasible.

I mean seriously for the user who wants to be up-to-date and WILL download and install the update manually, why can there not be an automatic way to do the exact same thing. The administrator (usually the user who actively uses it), would have full control over how/when updates are updated. If they want to approve any/every update, they can micro-manage. If they assume it has been sufficiently well tested to be released for general consumption they can set it to auto update. I see little to no difference between that system and what's already in place (aside from the extra work created for end users).

And the problem with the M$ analogy is also the fact that M$ is operated for profit, thus has an interest in NOT distributing updates from version to version (XP -> Longhorn). However BOINC is innately open source and not profit-oriented (rather, science and knowledge oriented), and is innately aligned toward disseminating information, sourcing out its product to whever wants to participate. Aside from which perticipation is voluntary. The people who participate do so because they WANT to and assume the risks. Administrstors should be aware of the reisks before downloading any piece of software. If not, they shouldn't be admins. So, I see no inherent conflict with the auto-update approach so long as sufficient leverage and control is given to the users in how it is applied (if at all). If properly implemented, if you want to do it manually or compile your own version of the source, go right ahead. Nothing stopping you from disabling the auto-update and going about self-compiling, then you've REALLY got nobody to blame but yourself. *wink*

Sorry to be so wordy, I just hink that ease-of-use *IS* a valuable feature and will attract more users than it will driveaway. Especially if it has the features that many other 'modern' programs have already...



----------

Okay, hopefully that all encapsulates the idea. Basically, I think it would be cool if there was a simple and admin-configurable/reasonably granular way for the administrator to set up automatic updates of the core client within a particular version (5.2.3 -> 5.4.9) (or even between version 3.2 -> 5.4.9).

The user/admin should be able to turn off the feature, if they don't want to risk unknown "features" compromising the system or they wish to compile it themselves, perhaps have a notify but don't download option and a fully automatic download and apply feature. That way staunch admins can disable updates, and loose admins can enable all. Hopefully then everyone can stay up to date. w00t!

One other consideration I guess I just thoght of is versioning compatibility kind of like in Firefox, so you know what projects/downloads have dependencies on others. IE, you can't download version 5 of Seti if you only have version 3 of boinc, since version 5 of Seti requires some features from versino 4.3 or higher of BOINC in order to work properly. Just food for thought...

Anyway, I'd assume that auto-update functinoality in various software is pretty mature by now, right? I'd assume there would be some kind of software to emulate or incoroporate open source code from, etc. And I'd assume they'd have worked out dependency and versioning stuff already...

Cheers,
~Michael

---

BOINC Seti@Home Stats:

Classic Seti@Home Stats:

Auto update of BOINC has been discussed before and the answer was no for the moment as it is too hard to implement and they want to work on the actual bugs rather than adding this feature

---

Join us in Chat (see the forum) Click the Sig

Auto update of BOINC has been discussed before and the answer was no for the moment as it is too hard to implement and they want to work on the actual bugs rather than adding this feature

Ahh, but something to consider for the future, I guess...?

Seems like when BOINC is initially installed and connected to a project it downloads a few setup files or whatnot (aside from just WU's). So, it seems like there's already somewhat of an inline update process. Though no doubt upgrades between release versions might be trickier...

I'd wonder if there are any open source projects that may have already pre-built an auto-updater, and maybe it could be emulated or mooched from (in order to not re-invent the wheel). I mean someone somewhere must have come upon this issue previously, yeah? I'd think a solution would be around someplace.

But, bug and other basic features are more pressing, I suppose.

Like I said, just something to consider. Cheers!

---

BOINC Seti@Home Stats:

Classic Seti@Home Stats:

Auto Update I don't think will ever make it, due to security restraints. But the next GUI will have an option to check if a newer version of BOINC is available, perhaps that it can download it as well. But installing? I doubt it.

---

Auto update of BOINC has been discussed before and the answer was no for the moment as it is too hard to implement

Ahh, but something to consider for the future, I guess...?

Just bumping this to keep it in mind.

It would be popular with many users.

they want to work on the actual bugs rather than adding this feature

ie they want to work on the actual bugs rather than adding any more

good plan :-)

There's fairly good backwards compatibility, so little reason to update regularly. Also, with each release there are new bugs, why expose yourself to new bugs if you're running unattended?

---

Auto Update I don't think will ever make it, due to security restraints. But the next GUI will have an option to check if a newer version of BOINC is available, perhaps that it can download it as well. But installing? I doubt it.

Now that's an idea I like.

Have a popup message to ask user if they would like to download/install new version?

---

JOIN Team ACC