People are finding this blog post because they’re finally getting notifications in their HA instance.
Curious, what percentage do you think of the entire install base for HA supervised… Has posted or even visited this blog? What about the initial blog notice? Do you even think it’s 1%?
I don’t know the answers to your questions.
Nor do I know how many people upgrade without first reading the Release Notes. However there’s clearly a minority who don’t and then complain that something changed/broke. The upshot is that there will always be people who don’t stay informed.
Tip:
Keep tabs on the project’s direction (minimally once a month).
I’ve argued against something similar to this notion… that users should be constantly needing to update and keep up with an ever changing blog and ecosystem.
I think some people don’t have a common definition of a “stable” build. Something that can be run for months without needing updates unless they are critical security patches.
Thankfully I think they got the hint, and eased back on forcing updates.
HA supervised users are, by definition, usually power users that may favor stability over getting every new feature at the cutting edge.
I had to literally block it from the internet for a while, because it would eventually auto update past a dependency on the docker installation that I had. And it would just break.
I didn’t mind the dependency on the latest version of docker, but I need to do updates on my system on my time schedule, not theirs. If that means being several months behind on the latest and greatest, then so be it.
I think the mentality that should be adopted here is, LTS. Long-term support. Where major version changes are optional.
Users can opt in to specific branches for updates. Many of you might like the updates every week like they have been rolling out.
But many of us run our house, which we think is critical, and would prefer stability and only updating if there is a feature we need to have, a bug that specifically applies to us, or critical security update.
I don’t think this statement is accurate for two reasons:
For a lot of commenters this is the first interaction with the forum. You can clearly see that in the “first time visitor” banner or the banner that says a user hasn’t visited in many months.
Let’s not propagate this as fact. I’m not saying the HA team did a bad job shopping the feedback around but no matter how much you gather feedback there will be people who are missed.
Best to avoid generalizations.
I meant to periodically remain informed about the project’s direction, otherwise you end up with posts asking “where were we supposed to provide feedback?”
LTS is a different topic (discussed to death elsewhere).
That’s a good point. That discussion will never die because it’s super important to people.
It might be good practice for the developers to push all deprecation notices directly to everyone as a repair notification.
Many systems will pop up in front of the user for such critical information.
Reliance on a blog is just asking for this to happen.
The stats show more than average participation.
I agree.
Here’s another hard truth, that I learned since participating in this project since 2018, user feedback isn’t always solicited nor accepted for all project decisions.
That tells you nothing. There simply isn’t a way to collect data that would be helpful. The blog statistics would have to know who has what type of installation.
That’s why it’s best to have the notification not just a blog, and coming from the installed instance itself.
Yeah, granted.
But you have to admit, that a major deprecation notice of an entire installation method, probably warrants such.
That was done in the June release; I received it.
What they’re unlikely to do is post repairs for user feedback.
They don’t have to put feedback requests in the repair notification.
Just do the notification prior to the end of the feedback period.
It was; in April (refer to the link in my previous post ).
Nope, I’m talking specifically about notices inside the HA instance, not a blog post.
The feedback topic closed at the end of May and the repair, containing the deprecation, appeared in the June release. In other words, it was a fait accompli by the end of May and users were informed shortly afterwards.
Requests for user feedback do not appear in HA. If you feel they should, post a Feature Request.
Yeah, that’s what I’m arguing against.
Hence the original meme.
A nice loud speaker announcement to the Earth, as the vogons are showing up, does not serve as adequate notice.
Now that we are getting repair notifications, people are indeed notified.
But doing that even one second after the feedback has ended, kind of defeats the purpose.
You may have missed my comment when I wrote, “They don’t have to put feedback requests in the repair notification.
Just do the notification prior to the end of the feedback period.”
The current repair notification, as is, is just fine,… It’s just way too late.
It’s more than merely questions or evidence-free assertions challenging it.
Where should this notification appear given that there is no facility for it within the application?
Even if one chose to report it as a repair, it wasn’t possible in the May release (repairs aren’t pushed to the application, they are coded within it).
I don’t remember, what is the current repair notification message text, that everyone has been getting this last few weeks?
Doesn’t not mention deprecation?