updater needs better user interaction option

huberto

Hi, today Version 2024050700 was reported to be the stable release for my device on https://grapheneos.org/releases
So I re-enabled 'System Updater', went to Settings->System-System updates ->Check for updates.
As expected I could find a notification about downloading the update - though still no info what verison is about to be installed... After reboot,
check revealed it's the 2024050300 :-( - I didn't want that version, nor could I prevent it from landing on my device.

The user should be asked before downloading a specific version as an absolute minimum level of control!

Even better was a 'System Updater' which is user configurable in a way, that it doesn't ever establish any network connection as long as user doesn't ask it to do so - for checking if there's an update in the 1st step only.
Afterwards user should see the Version of the update available next to a 'download & install' button.

I never understood why of all apps just the 'System Updater' doesn't respect any user preference at all and provokes salient network traffic - how many users establish such sockets... tells much to much for no good imho.

Thanks for the update and all the other unutterable magnificent work btw. Of all projects I know, GrapheneOS was the biggest loss if it vanishes from our globe these days 🂱

GrapheneOS

huberto https://grapheneos.org/releases says the latest stable release is 2024050300. All production releases are announced there and then go through Alpha, Beta and then Stable if no major regression is found. It's always going to download the latest version, not any other, and that's not going to be changed. You're meant to update to each release and it's not clear why you would have skipped 2024050300 which had important updates. You aren't really saving much bandwidth skipping releases due to delta updates shipping only the differences from one release to another. In fact, it's more efficient in terms of bandwidth updating apps via OS updates than our app repository client right now if that's your concern, until the app repository also has delta updates.

Dumdum

This was entirely down to the Release Channel (Settings > System > System updates > Release channel) that you're device is set to. The 2024050700 isn't in Stable yet so naturally it downloaded 2024050300. In other words, nothing to worry about.

huberto

Thanks for replies. Now I know what went wrong: .org/release doesn't only list -stable channel versions, but also -beta, and I didn't carefully read...
(instead I just took the first device match, but instad should have looked at https://grapheneos.org/releases#tangorpro-stable explicitly. Following the release announcement link and scrolling up first lists the -beta channel versions, which isn't clearly separated from the -release channel list. At least not clearly enough for slipshod readers like me - maybe turn it into a table - one column for -release and the column next to it showning -beta?).

@Dumdum, the "promotional" mode ('releases' landing in -beta before beeing promoted to -stable) is perfectly fine and well known and understood, and also that there's only one version to install via 'System Updater' - the latest one. But I dislike the 'surprise' mode of the 'System Updater'.
Most appreciated would be showing at least the version info in the notification of the download that's ongoing (maybe together with additional meaningful info like "Incremental update V1 -> V2: size in MiB"). And I would very much like to have the choice whether I want to start the download or just digest the notice! And - most important, like initially mentioned a config option which defines to require user-interaction before establishing any network connection from the 'System Updater'. This could be a scheduled notification like "System Updater wants to look for updated releases in var.yourbranch, press OK to proceed". Something similar to the 'update succeeded, reboot now' message.

@GrapheneOS, even if I don't save bandwidth resp. total ammount of transferred packets, I sometimes want to avoid downtimes.
The donwtime today was superfluous. It was my own fault because I could have found the required info to avoid, so I have no reason to complain, but not needing to disable the 'System Updater' in order to avoid flashy traffic patterns would be highly appreciated - I guess I'm not alone with that.

Thanks, happy -stable move!

akc3n

huberto maybe turn it into a table - one column for -release and the column next to it showning -beta?).

HI, thanks for the feedback, we'll take it under consideration.

It was my own fault because I could have found the required info to avoid, so I have no reason to complain

Glad you got it sorted it on.