I do not know if you have that power, but if you want OTA to die you will have to get everyone on board and present a good alternative that is both technical and catchy.
>From what I've seen, everyone is using the OTA terminology (bug reports, reddit, community blogs, Canonical blogs) and this is unlikely to change without a coordinated effort. I would hate it for the system settings to show one thing and for everyone to use something else... (which is sadly already the case) Op vrijdag 24 juli 2015 heeft Matthew Paul Thomas <m...@canonical.com> het volgende geschreven: > Thanks for this suggestion. > > Ubuntu has never been competent at giving software version numbers: the > Year.Month scheme is routinely misunderstood <https://goo.gl/IVxKuA>, > LTS vs. non-LTS versions are similarly confusing, and hundreds of Ubuntu > packages are simultaneously incomplete enough to have pre-1.0 version > numbers but somehow complete enough to ship by default (dpkg -l | grep " > 0."). > > Unfortunately Ubuntu Touch makes this even worse, with at least seven > different data used for identifying an OS version. I'm currently trying > to distill these into a single brief string, that we can display on the > "About This Phone" screen, that tells you most of what you need to know > to understand things like whether a particular bug is fixed on your > phone. <https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntu-phone/msg13955.html> > > One thing I won't do, though, is add the OTA number as an eighth datum. > Not just because adding an eighth thing would be making the problem > worse rather than better. But also because numbering OTA updates is > meaningless. It made sense while there was only one Ubuntu Touch device > widely available, but that is no longer the case. It is nonsense to > describe, for example, an update as "OTA-5" when it is, in fact, only > the first OTA update ever for the Meizu MX4. "Update" and "version" are > words with different meanings. > > This is similar to the period before the first Ubuntu phone was > released, where engineers commonly referred to a particular version as > "Ubuntu RTM". <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-rtm> RTM for what, > exactly? Only for the BQ Aquaris E4.5. That's silly in retrospect, > because we've had and will have RTM for multiple other devices. > > If you see any engineer in future refer to an Ubuntu version using an > OTA number, please mock them gently. > > ** Changed in: ubuntu-system-settings (Ubuntu) > Status: New => Won't Fix > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1475568 > > Title: > Use OTA terminology in system settings > > Status in ubuntu-system-settings package in Ubuntu: > Won't Fix > > Bug description: > Describing the updates in "OTA x" terms is very common. > > - Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/address-book-app/+bug/1437925 > - Status updates: https://unity.ubuntu.com/2015/07/15/whats-new-in-ota-5/ > > However, looking at the system settings' about section on my phone, it is not clear what "OTA" update I have currently installed. > * Is it the version number? I guess not since that number is in its twenties and the current OTA is smaller than ten. > * is it the number after the dot of the image number? > > It would be very handy if the OTA version number was clearly marked > somewhere in the system settings. > > > USE CASE: > I want to check to see if a bug is really fixed in an update. I see that the bug is not fixed on my current device and should be fixed in OTA 4. I do not know what OTA my phone is running, so I cannot know if the bug is falsely marked as fixed. ( https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/address-book-app/+bug/1437925) > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-system-settings/+bug/1475568/+subscriptions > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1475568 Title: Use OTA terminology in system settings To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-system-settings/+bug/1475568/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
