auto update ?

[Rene ']

i see, you think notifying the user of a new version is bad, mixing it up with forced updates, like from msn.
 
well see, notifications are just that, notifications. its a good thing. especially for like you said for the exceptions. after all, we can't spend everyday looking at the site if there's something new.
 
As for what, when, how, if they are applied, that is up to the user, a choice. 
You see my point i'm sure, notifications are good, so i figure the plugin should on by default. 
 
i've never received them from pidgin and would have prefered to be told new verisons fixed bugs i've encountered.
 
thanks for the plugin info, much appreciated
cheers
 

 
> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:56:52 +0000
> From: forums at david-woolley.me.uk
> To: rdumoulin1 at sympatico.ca
> CC: support at pidgin.im
> Subject: Re: auto update ?
> 
> Rene ' wrote:
> > 
> > > No, which I think is a good thing.
> > sory i don't understand why having an old version of pidgin be a good thing?
> 
> Except possibly for pure security updates, and sometimes even for them, 
> updates usually introduce new bugs. IT departments, in the case of 
> machines with important business functions, will often delay updates for 
> months, until they are thoroughly tested in the exact configuration they 
> use with the exact software they use, before releasing them for 
> production use.
> 
> I'm not sure with Pidgin, but with the standard Microsoft, non-.NET 
> software installation model, installing or updating a program can update 
> DLLs used by other programs. This used to be a major source of Windows 
> instability, referred to as DLL Hell.
> 
> Also, it is my machine, not the Pidgin developers'. I should have some 
> control over what is on it and when it changes.
> 
> There are also good security reasons. If the distribution machine for a 
> popular auto-updated package gets compromised, very large numbers of 
> machines could get compromised very quickly.
> 
> >
> > anyway can you direct me to that plugin you mentioned plz ?
> 
> I have. It is included, but disabled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> David Woolley
> Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
> RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
> that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://pidgin.im/pipermail/support/attachments/20110121/ab02893d/attachment.html>