|
Gianluca Administrator Posts: 1274
24/06/2019
|
chef wrote:
I haven't been clear enough. I didn't write nor claim that AV stopped downloads. I meant that I observed that SyMenu aborted initiated download while AV intervened after successful download for inspection, holding back the download success until end of AV checking. In the view of SyMenu download was still in progress while in view of operating system and AV download was finished. That's no error. That behavior may depend on AV edition. Better AV editions try checking so soon while basic editions try it later when another program opens it for execution or unpacking. SyMenu package management seems to assume that either no AV software is installed or only such a basic edition one, not a more powerful one. That's a bug in SyMenu package management if my assumption is true.
I perfectly disagree with this.
chef wrote:
Which kind of software reports initiates the reported timeout?
How may I know?
How does SyMenu package management determine if download is ongoing or not?
How does SyMenu package management distinguish between downloading and some intervention by operating system (i.e. configured Windows policies or security policies marking every download) or AV software?
A download in the Internet works this way:
- hi man, I need that file
- sure, give me your hand before
- (what a nice start.. this is one of the boring guys...) Sorry you are right, what a rude I am. Now can you give me that file. I really need it
- no man, since I'm a very precise host and I'm following all the protocols, I firstly have to give you some information about the download
- (uuuhhh this guys is is a real pain in the ass... I have things to do)..... then OK, give me the info
- here is the file name, its mime type, its size...
The sketch goes on but the thing to understand is that SyMenu doesn't make anything different from any other download manager in the world.
SyMenu knows that a download is finished when the file reaches the expected size, it declares timeout when the file is no longer downloaded but the host doesn't send any byte for a while, if the OS or the AV make something with a downloaded file, the download manager can do nothing because of the system privileges order.
Your browser behaves exactly the same way. Everything is on the hands of Windows or AV.
chef wrote:
So how does SyMenu package management handle reported download success (after passed AV check) if it reported the same download as aborted due to timeout before?
It's impossible. SyMenu can report a download success only if a timeout hasn't happened.
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
|
|
|
link
|
|
Gianluca Administrator Posts: 1274
24/06/2019
|
chef wrote:
I don't like coffee. I prefer tea. And yes, for undetermined causes, I'll repeat at different times of day.
That sounds much to conspiracy theory which raised strongly in popularity in the northern hemisphere of our planet, not only in Europe but also in North-America and Asia. I see the world and the Internet differently. I started to use Internet almost 35 years ago which was a nice place of many kind people and only few dangerous ones. The web has been invented more than half a decade later. The Internet has changes since. Security requirements have strongly increased also in the Internet. So its not so strange and dangerous as several people claim. The aim of increasing security levels is creating better identification of risks and dangers, provide simple and basic methods to handle them. And I don't understand Ministers of Internal Affairs of several powerful countries why they're responsible to increase such security levels and awareness (i.e. European KRIT regulation on critical infrastructure) while the same ministers want to prevent higher security levels in order to make work easier for law enforcement authorities and criminals.
You should put a smile occasionally
I better understand when you are making a joke 
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
|
|
|
link
|
|
Gianluca Administrator Posts: 1274
24/06/2019
|
chef wrote:
How does your assessment conclude that Google Play Store would be a centralized hosting repository?
I'm using the term centralized and decentralized in a different way. I don't refer to the server topology but to the ownership. Google own it's Google Play Store entirely. It has the power to admit your app or to reject it. It hosts your app.
I have no such a control on the suite programs. I only link them.
chef wrote:
I don't understand what you mean when describing "chaos we have to deal with the Internet"
I intend that the Internet doesn't force anyone to organize his own content in any particular way.
A different environment instead, for example the Google Play Store, forces its user to organize the content in a particular way.
If I want to mimic the Google Play Store without exert my ownership on the published programs I have to create a tool that organize the chaos.
|
|
|
link
|
|
Gianluca Administrator Posts: 1274
24/06/2019
|
chef wrote:
So what does it mean that SyMenu package manager reports 0/54 for VirusTotal report?
It means that when the editor reviewed the package this VT was able to analyze it with 54 engine and no one reported a suspicios file.
This condition can change resubmitting the same package in another moment but SyMenu remains stuck to the first report until the editor reviews the package.
|
|
|
link
|
|
chef Posts: 47
24/06/2019
|
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
Then I wanted to report it to SPS editor. This revealed the next bug. Clicking on the corresponding option opens a new tab in the web broswer. But the opening page is a web error page
I contacted the editor to ask him to re-activate the contact form.
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
I tried also to contact the SPS editor. As I did not get a feed back before if you would be so kind to forward these posts, I tried if the same user name in this forum relates to the same person and wrote a PM via this forum to raise his attention on these posts. And he replied to me similarly that fixing will take some time as he's currently not at home.
According to what I understood of the contact form hosting web site, re-activation probably will not work. It sounds to me that creating a new contact form with the new method on offer of the same web site will create a new contact form. I'v not clue if that new contact form will result in the same URL which has been intentionally deleted by that hoster or into a new one. If the result is a new one, creation of the new contact form will not be sufficient as this SPS editors SPS packages will then need a refresh of the contact field.
This raises the new question if the SPS package manager does support and recognize an updated contact field as I didn't read so far of a versioning of SPS independant of the versioning of the packages they describe?
I fear that SPS package manager will ignore it as long as the described package doesn't get updated. And I further guess that a work around will be to force update in SPS package manager in order to take into account the new content field. Am I right?
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
Create a free contact form for your website!
Sorry no time for this, the priority is SyMenu not the web site.
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
This was meant as part of the message addressing the (currently not directly addressable) SPS package editor, not you as you aren't the SPS package editor of those packages.
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
And here you see another bug resp. limitation of this forum feature as I don't have any influence on font size. It's a side effect of quoting off different sources and how the forum software handles it. I can only influence style like bold, italics or underlined as far as I can see.
Again with the forum... I can't correct the forum bugs because I'm not the forum author.
IMHO it's a good software, it's free, it's easy to use, it's compatible with the platform I'm using for the web site, it it's bugged it's not so bugged to be unusable, and I have not time to create a forum software by myself. So please try to workaround all the bugs of this bad software and don't report them to me.
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
I know that you're not the forum software author. And as the forum software is in trial edition, it reveals its source in the mean time and found the authors note on the few differences between trial edition and subscribed resp. registered edition (and that your usage of trial edition is explicitely permitted by the author). What I don't know is when I observe a limitation if it is due to its configuration or the software itself. The first variant could be fixed by you while the second one obviously not.
No. It's not free nor freeware. Only the trial edition is free while the others are on subscription (with almost same feature set but varying support options all missing for the trial edition). (In the other forum on portable software in the states where you're member too, there is a classification of software types/licenses and some trends. According to the FAQ there, such mixed types and licenses are wide spread resp. converted to.)
Your choice wasn't limited to use this trial edition forum software or create your own. There are several other forum software available free of charge, some probably more wide spread, probably requiring to install another tool so that alternative forum software may run on your hosting environment.
I'll continue trying to find work arounds as far as suitable and ignore other effects of the forum software (as long as they're not blocking). And as you see, I already found some work arounds and you provided me already another hint in this thread. (Some have to do with the order of processing, just changing processing order when writing.)
So as far as my notes on the forum software concern you, it's fine to provide feed back if the observation is due to configuration or inherent of the forum software.
And as far as I've seen, there are forum users who master this forum software much more with astonishing effects.
|
|
|
link
|
|
Gianluca Administrator Posts: 1274
24/06/2019
|
chef wrote:
SPS package manager does support and recognize an updated contact field as I didn't read so far of a versioning of SPS independant of the versioning of the packages they describe?
Yes sure.
You can fix whatever field and SyMenu will recognize it as a change in the SPS that doesn't affect the program described by the SPS itself.
If you change the version field instead, SyMenu will recognize it as a program update and suggest the update action to the user.
Well if you change the program name, SyMenu will recognize the SPS as related to another program because the name is the SPS key. But this is an exception because the name never changes so take in consideration rules 1) and 2).
|
|
|
link
|
|
chef Posts: 47
24/06/2019
|
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
The best option would be that SPS allows such a mirror list [of download URL] and SPS editors use it
This could be a nice feature above all if your considerations about the SourceForge limitation policies against repeated download is true.
Can you supply some official documentation regarding this limitations?
I don't think a limitation like this can be kept secret because otherwise they'll start to have bug reports from their unaware users.
I don't see any dependancy.
My proposal should always work regardless of repository concerned. And it may increase reliability of SPS package manager regardless of repository or package concerned. Only for cases where the software authors prohibit such second source or mirror list for download, this list would just contain the single member as currently. (You mentioned one such software author in the forum. I know at least a few others.)
As I already wrote to you by email, I remember such a recommendation and limitation published on SourceForge before a major ownership change of that repository. I didn't save copies of such web pages as already written in that email. So I can't supply you this documentation for the case of SourceForge as I looked up before resp. during writing that email. I further mentioned the case of the package SIV System Information Viewer where even you found such an authors clear preference to download not of his web site but instead of the mirror list he provided.
Do you need also documentation on the limitation policy?
It's a long time ago that I've read those. And I didn't save them locally. If you need it, I'll have to search again.
Independant of that I occassionally manage a few web sites. I didn't investigate when such configuration options are provided by the web server itself and when by some security extension. I can assure you that such solutions exist and are in use. When I configure such items, I take sliding windows of either in the range between 1 and 5 minutes into consideration, and always to take additional conditions into the evaluation in order to prevent locking me out myself and to address (at least partially) dangers of denial of service (DOS resp. distributed variant DDOS) attacks. It's a hardening policy for abuse prevention.
|
|
|
link
|
|
Gianluca Administrator Posts: 1274
24/06/2019
|
My request has a simple reason: SourceForge or whatever web site hosting files that needs to be downloaded hardly create these kind of policies.
You can find policies against DDoS attacks but why they should limit the downloading ability?
Some web sites need the users navigate to the page because they live with ads but if they allow the automatic download what's the sense in limiting it?
None. They want their materials spread all over the Internet so their actions will be eventually to offer multiple download mirrors, to increase download speed, to grant low latency.
This is the reason for which I'm asking some documentations. Because it's strange that SourceForge acts this way while Github for example acts in the exact opposite way.
|
|
|
link
|
|
chef Posts: 47
24/06/2019
|
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
I haven't been clear enough. I didn't write nor claim that AV stopped downloads. I meant that I observed that SyMenu aborted initiated download while AV intervened after successful download for inspection, holding back the download success until end of AV checking. In the view of SyMenu download was still in progress while in view of operating system and AV download was finished. That's no error. That behavior may depend on AV edition. Better AV editions try checking so soon while basic editions try it later when another program opens it for execution or unpacking. SyMenu package management seems to assume that either no AV software is installed or only such a basic edition one, not a more powerful one. That's a bug in SyMenu package management if my assumption is true.
I perfectly disagree with this.
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
I didn't catch up on which part you perfectly disagree?
Do you disagree with my statement not to refer to AV stopping download?
Do you disagree with my observation that SyMenu aborted its initated download after download has finished and not yet reported back to SyMenu?
Do you disagree with my assessment that operating system behaviour or AV behaviour to intervene is no error?
Do you disagree with my observation of differences between AV editions (regardless if of same AV publisher or different ones)?
Do you disagree with my perception on the relation between SyMenu and AV software or operating system file system configuration?
Or on all together?
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
Which kind of software reports initiates the reported timeout?
How may I know?
How does SyMenu package management determine if download is ongoing or not?
How does SyMenu package management distinguish between downloading and some intervention by operating system (i.e. configured Windows policies or security policies marking every download) or AV software?
A download in the Internet works this way:
- hi man, I need that file
- sure, give me your hand before
- (what a nice start.. this is one of the boring guys...) Sorry you are right, what a rude I am. Now can you give me that file. I really need it
- no man, since I'm a very precise host and I'm following all the protocols, I firstly have to give you some information about the download
- (uuuhhh this guys is is a real pain in the ass... I have things to do)..... then OK, give me the info
- here is the file name, its mime type, its size...
The sketch goes on but the thing to understand is that SyMenu doesn't make anything different from any other download manager in the world.
SyMenu knows that a download is finished when the file reaches the expected size, it declares timeout when the file is no longer downloaded but the host doesn't send any byte for a while, if the OS or the AV make something with a downloaded file, the download manager can do nothing because of the system privileges order.
Your browser behaves exactly the same way. Everything is on the hands of Windows or AV.
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
These questions were not on the download itself but on SyMenu resp. SPS package manager management of handling downloads.
I disagree on your claim that SyMenu doesn't make anything different from any other download manager in the world. It doesn't match my observation. And you provided a work around in your inital reply which was working perfectly for almost all cases where SyMenu aborted with timeout error. If your claim of no difference would be right, that work around would not have worked!
I can assure you that your promise of your second to last sentence quoted above is not true. My standard web browser doesn't behave so strangely. Your hint for work around of the SPS package manager bug works very well. It did not experience any timeout although SPS package manager aborted prematurely on the same packages reporting time outs in contrast to your promise to experience the same timeouts with this builtin download manager of the standard web browser!
I know various download protocols. I even know command line tools handling various of those protocols in various variants. Sometimes I need them to bypass size limitations of download managers builtin to web browsers, never for time outs (except SPS package manager!). These protocols have their own timers at network level, transport level and application level. For longer lasting downloads (i.e. a complete operating system distribution, a complete application stack intended for import into virtual machine), these download managers provide the option to enable a feature so that the application level get's confirmation that the download is still going on to prevent premature abort of such long lasting downloads. Where may I configure this feature in SPS package manager?
Why do I need to activate such a feature in SPS package manager even if the downloads take between 1 and 6 minutes while I may need them with other tools and wweb browser only sometimes for downloads lasting much more than 40 minutes?
When I use your working work around, it seems to me that for some repositories, the download does not report the size in advance while doing so for other repositories. So why does SPS package manager initate an abort on ongoing download even if the repository didn't provide the size to expect before nor during the download?
How may I deactivate that timer or reset it to some download protocol default of 10 minutes network inactivity?
Why doesn't SPS package manager limit itself to the timers specified in the download protocols but uses its own?
At the GUI level, I didn't see a configuration option for this internal download timer. How may I configure it either by configuration file or command line?
I didn't look up what kind of information SyMenu provides on those time outs in its logs yet. Where may I find these?
And for what shall I look?
I remember that package Picasa was aborted due to this timeout while the download has finished at network and transport level while not yet at application level because AV software was still proceeding its check. With a look at the logs I may report other packages where downloads were aborted by SPS package manager while the downloads were even not finished at network level! They could be downloaded without any problems with the download manager builtin to my standard web browser. And your hint was directing me how to get the input for this alternative download manager off the SPS package manager.
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
So how does SyMenu package management handle reported download success (after passed AV check) if it reported the same download as aborted due to timeout before?
It's impossible. SyMenu can report a download success only if a timeout hasn't happened.
edited by Gianluca on 24/06/2019
This situation is not impossible. This situation is the reality for almost all packages which SPS package manager aborted prematurely with time out although in most cases the download was not yet finished and in a few cases the download had finished at network layer but not at application layer. And as far as I've read, I'm not the only user reporting such SyMenu "installation" problems in the forum.
And the question was not when SyMenu reports download success. The question was on how SyMenu package management handles the incoming feed back of the network layer for successful download of its initiated download request while the network layer did not report any timeout and SyMenu already processed some download requests later while having reported aborted the still ongoing download as aborted for timeout reasons which cannot be network timeouts but have to by SPS package manager timeouts and SPS package manager not yet having finished the multi-package download request.
|
|
|
link
|
|
chef Posts: 47
24/06/2019
|
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
So what does it mean that SyMenu package manager reports 0/54 for VirusTotal report?
It means that when the editor reviewed the package this VT was able to analyze it with 54 engine and no one reported a suspicios file.
This condition can change resubmitting the same package in another moment but SyMenu remains stuck to the first report until the editor reviews the package.
Thanks for this precision. With the help of your published manual, I already assumed part of that meaning of 0/54. The important information is the context you now added. I recommend amending that manual section accordingly. The "at the moment of package release" resp. submit would be fine for the understanding there. And your second sentence is worth a N.B. note in that same section of the manual.
|
|
|
link
|
|
Gianluca Administrator Posts: 1274
25/06/2019
|
chef wrote:
I didn't catch up on which part you perfectly disagree?
The last one where you write: "That's a bug in SyMenu package management if my assumption is true."
chef wrote:
I disagree on your claim that SyMenu doesn't make anything different from any other download manager in the world.
You partially right here.
It's totally useless to speak about this topic in this forum (who cares how SyMenu download the programs in so deep details????) and above all you can use a network sniffer to satisfy this curiosity by yourself, but I can avoid you this fatigue.
The only difference between a download manager of a browser and the SyMenu download manager is the user agent I use (mine is wget, the browser one is its own).
This is the only reason for the slightly differences between the behaviors.
chef wrote:
This situation is not impossible. This situation is the reality for almost all packages which SPS package manager aborted prematurely with time out although in most cases the download was not yet finished and in a few cases the download had finished at network layer but not at application layer. And as far as I've read, I'm not the only user reporting such SyMenu "installation" problems in the forum.
Again, it's impossible.
The installation of any SPS is split up in several moments:
- downloading
- unpacking
- copying
You can have a problem at any of these levels and it doesn't mean that your download has had a timeout. It can be a difficulty during unpacking, a changed internal structure int the package, an AV that locks one of the mentioned action... Trust what I'm saying... I'm the one who wrote the code.
Sincerely I'm a bit tired of all your questions.
Usually a user has got an issue, reports it, I solve it and we are all happy.
Or a user doesn't understand a feature, asks for it, and I reply.
Or a user suggests something new, I analyze it and decide if it's worth including or not in SyMenu.
Instead you are investigating the internals of the program with no cues in your hands because you didn't read the code, with no experience in the program because you are a new user, and, above all, without a real purpose.
Do you really think that these endless interrogation can contribute in some ways to the application improving?
I'm sorry, it can't.
And even if you are suggesting something good, it's so hide inside your rant that I'm not even able to recognize it.
My feeling is that you are only showing how much good and analytics and experienced you are.
OK you are the best.
Are we good now?
Can I return to more useful activities now?
Thanks.
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
|
|
|
link
|
|
chef Posts: 47
27/06/2019
|
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
I disagree on your claim that SyMenu doesn't make anything different from any other download manager in the world.
You partially right here.
It's totally useless to speak about this topic in this forum (who cares how SyMenu download the programs in so deep details????) and above all you can use a network sniffer to satisfy this curiosity by yourself, but I can avoid you this fatigue.
The only difference between a download manager of a browser and the SyMenu download manager is the user agent I use (mine is wget, the browser one is its own).
This is the only reason for the slightly differences between the behaviors.
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
When downloading the whole suite as recommended on the SyMenu project web site, most gets downloaded and a few packages not. For most of these the reason is with SyMenu, not with the download nor unpacking nor copying, and SyMenu reports timeout as reason for abort of download, not for unpacking nor copying. When downloading the whole suite, if finishes its work on my computer after something between 2 and 3 hours.
I use another tool wsusoffline which does also downloading, unpacking, copying, repacking and a few other things according to my limited configuration of what concerns me and my few computers (current and older ones). It also uses wget for downloading. The whole process takes more than 8 hours and doesn't produce any timeout on my computer, even if run off an USB 2.0 stick! (And this tool is already included even in SyMenu suite!)
I tried your work arounds for coping with these timeouts. It worked for most of them. (You don't need to worry on those where it didn't. As directed by you, I've to contact either AV software publishers for some and SPS editors for some. That's already going on.) So for this large majority of cases with SyMenu reporting timeout during download, the work around would encounter the same problems as SyMenu and hence not work. So I've to conclude that there is an unknown limitation within SyMenu resp. its SPS package manager which is not documented. Such a mismatch is usually called a bug. That's why I report it in the bug report thread of this forum as desired by the project SyMenu.
Gianluca wrote:
chef wrote:
This situation is not impossible. This situation is the reality for almost all packages which SPS package manager aborted prematurely with time out although in most cases the download was not yet finished and in a few cases the download had finished at network layer but not at application layer. And as far as I've read, I'm not the only user reporting such SyMenu "installation" problems in the forum.
Again, it's impossible.
The installation of any SPS is split up in several moments:
- downloading
- unpacking
- copying
You can have a problem at any of these levels and it doesn't mean that your download has had a timeout. It can be a difficulty during unpacking, a changed internal structure int the package, an AV that locks one of the mentioned action... Trust what I'm saying... I'm the one who wrote the code.
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
I still don't understand. This has nothing to do with trust. I'm trusting you. Otherwise I would not report.
Do I understand right, that SyMenu reports abort of download with timeout, even when download was successful but issues appeared with unpacking or copying?
Do I understand right, that SyMenu may experience difficulties during unpacking when done automatically while not experiencing such difficulties when doing so with local package as source instead of web site?
That sounds like strange mystery.
Again, I'm not writing here on the small minority of cases where AV intervention was the reason. And this AV intervention was a lock just in one case, not the others.
Gianluca wrote:
Usually a user has got an issue, reports it, I solve it and we are all happy.
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
I can confirm that I reported my issue in the forum when doing the first time installation as guided on the project web site. And I further can confirm that you addressed the part on timeout with a work around. But a work around is something different then a solution. It allows to progress while the issue still being unresolved within the program.
Work around are intended to progress while keeping the bug reported and on a list for looking when and how to find the root cause and to fix it. That's why this project SyMenu has decided to use this thread for bug reporting. And you confirm that this decision of the SyMenu project creates some difficulties to you to recognize suggestions for improvement. Or did you mean something different with declaring these suggestions as hidden?
Gianluca wrote:
Instead you are investigating the internals of the program with no cues in your hands because you didn't read the code,
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
No. Your observation is wrong. How do you come to such premature conclusions or perceptions?
I only reported my observations of SyMenu and its SPS package manager. I didn't investigate the internals of the program as it seems to me not having access to these internals.
These observations give some indication which questions to raise for finding the reason of the observation. In the software testing industry it is well known the developers are biased on testing. And the observations with working work arounds proposed by you clarify some observations while keeping it unchanged on others that your analysis seems aborted prematurely. That's common in commercial software while open source software focuses more on root cause analysis before going to work arounds. As far as I know SyMenu is neither commercial nor open source. While both handling policies are valid, only the root cause analysis can assure a fix and solution. And it is you who claimed of always solving issues which wasn't the case here with most of these timeout errors.
Gianluca wrote:
Instead you are investigating the internals of the program with no cues in your hands because you didn't read the code, with no experience in the program because you are a new user,
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
Yes, I'm new to the program SyMenu. With that little experience I could at least report back to another user one way to handle his problem via this forum within three days. I call it a learning curve. You call it no experience.
Gianluca wrote:
Instead you are investigating the internals of the program with no cues in your hands because you didn't read the code, with no experience in the program because you are a new user, and, above all, without a real purpose.
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
I can't follow how you come to such a conclusion of not having a real purpose. Or do you want to say that new users have no purpose when reporting issues they observed?
My purpose is to help improve the quality of the program. That's why I use the means proposed and recommended by the project SyMenu which is this forum, in particular this thread for reporting bugs and troubles encountered with SyMenu. What did I miss?
Gianluca wrote:
Do you really think that these endless interrogation can contribute in some ways to the application improving?
I'm sorry, it can't.
And even if you are suggesting something good, it's so hide inside your rant that I'm not even able to recognize it.
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
Which interrogations?
If you mean my questions, then yes I think they may help analysis for fixing, reveal misunderstandings for clarification, and hence help improve the application. How do you come to the conclusion that my questions are interrogations?
How do you come to the conclusion that such questions may not help to improve the application?
Or do you mean your false resp. premature accusations as interrogations?
And no. It's not true that you don't recognize good suggestions. It happens that you don't recognize it immediately. But that's something different of not recognizing it at all. You're better then you think and claim!
Do you mean that because I made suggestions for improvement, you'll not consider them although you recognized them.
Gianluca wrote:
My feeling is that you are only showing how much good and analytics and experienced you are.
OK you are the best.
Are we good now?
Can I return to more useful activities now?
Thanks.
edited by Gianluca on 25/06/2019
I didn't write about good or bad. So it seems that your feelings are deceiving you.
What kind of more useful activities are you refering to?
If you have difficulties with some kinds of bug reports, why not considering to extend the forum FAQ or add a pinned thread for directing and qualifying what you consider a good bug report, what a bad bug report, what an insufficient bug report, ... ?
And why not fixing this major cause of premature download abort of SPS package manager timeout (instead of download timeout)? (I may repeat my two alternative proposals if you like.)
Again, it's your decision when and how to address it as you provided a working work around. Priorization is completely up to you. I didn't ask for an immediate solution. That's the difference between bug reports and bug fixing. Other projects consider it more useful to use other tools for monitoring progress on bug reports (handling). I don't prescribe the SyMenu project which tools to use for this purpose. I use what this project provides and recommends. What did I miss?
|
|
|
link
|
|
ziusudra Posts: 5
27/06/2019
|
Woow. That's amazing discussion )
Feature suggestion,bug reports and some other stuff may be written in different topic different context and in actionable format
This may be helpful for prioritizing and organizing issues and suggestions in the context of strategic decision
This is why.. all of these suggestions, critiques are valuable and appears the product of deep analiysis; but some of them has critical importance, some of them simply bugs,feature suggestion,strategis decision issues,documentation issues, lack of official bla bla visibility issues. Also some of them may be easy to imply,some of them may not be possible in current architecture ,some of them may not be feasible, and some has low priority
It's impossible for average people to reach conclusion ..
Anyway, it's better to break this dicsussion here and discuss every subject under appropriate topics.
|
|
|
link
|