Re: Suggestion for upcoming NVDA build

 

Hi everyone,
Let me give you a "backstage tour" regarding this issue and why the suggestion will not be implemented:
As you may know by now, NV Access produces at least three branches: rc (release candidate), master, and next. The rc branch is where the stable (and official) releases happen, master is perpetual beta, and next is alpha-level code (bleeding-edge). For those using Chrome (or are reading the Chrome thread) may have noticed a similar pattern: Canary is equivalent to NVDA next (alpha-level code and is built nightly), dev and beta are equivalent to NVDA master, and the release that gets used by many users is equivalent to NVDA stable build.
Sometimes, NV Access or others may produce other snapshots. In the past, NV Access was known for producing snapshots from branches that required public testing (such as feedback when entering Asian characters). At one point, I have produced third-party snapshots, ranging from Windows 10 support, support for newer processor instructions, initial support for Outlook Calendar, and most recently, UEB tests (my snapshots, unlike those of NV Access, does not support updates).
When we produce snapshots, we assume the following:
* Many people are using stable builds.
* Using a snapshot means more bugs.
* When users are installing snapshots, they do so either because they are adventurous or would like to test upcoming features.
Regarding the last point, in order to move from stable build to development branches and vice versa, you need to download and install the desired build in question. This is because of the following:
* NVDA keeps a record of the branch it should query when connecting to NV Access server to retrieve updates. You can "fool" NVDA to download a different snapshot via code, but it won't work (this record is constant and will revert back to its original string once NVDA restarts).
* When NVDA checks for updates, it'll check the branch in question, and will present the update prompt if the version you've got is different than that of the one hosted on the server.
* Unless silenced, NVDA will check for updates every 24 hours.
Thus, when "changing" branches, you need to do this willingly. Because snapshots are reserved for a specific audience (although stable build users could try them out), the user interface for specifying branches will not be implemented.
Cheers,
Joseph

-----Original Message-----
From: Pete [mailto:emac00@...]
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 8:14 AM
To: nvda@groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Suggestion for upcoming NVDA build


Snapshot users use snapshots.
Main branch users use main versions.
This doesn't require the main branch to be modified and instead targets the wanted modification users, snapshot users with the update to snapshots witch is what they want rite?
The normal update channel will stil be there in the snapshot version so if a snapshot user wants to update to a main version she or he can do so if desired.
People using snapshots are more likely to upgrade snapshots.
Why clutter up nvda main with extra options they may, no more than likely use?
Having said all that, the option to update to snapshot versions in the main branchbrantch would keep the code consistant between main and snapshot.
if a snapshot user upgrades to a main version they would loose upgrade to snapshot version, so may be better to modifie the main branch.
Keeping the snapshot and main versions separate makes more sense.
It is less confusing for
snapshot users to update to snapshot version updates
and
main version users update to main version updates
respectively and exclusively.

Pete


On 3/27/2016 10:04 AM, Lenron wrote:
You should just have the option in the main version if you wish to
update to a snap shot or not. I normally love grabbing the next build
as soon as I can.

On 3/27/16, Pete <emac00@...> wrote:
Hi Chris
What I am talking about is the snap shot versions of nvda check for
snap shot updates them selves.
In that way the normal nvda dist users could just go on using the
normal nvda dist with out worrying if it will update to a snap shot.
Pete



On 3/26/2016 6:41 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote:
Well, when on a snapshot, it actually does notify you of updates at
this point. Not sure when the last time was you tried.
---
Christopher Gilland
JAWS Certified, 2016.
Training Instructor.

@AHeart4God316
Phone: (704) 256-8010 Extension 401.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Masic" <list@...>
To: <nvda@groups.io>
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 9:03 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Suggestion for upcoming NVDA build


Personaly i think it could be an good idea. I think many like me
often forgot to check for updates even for snapshot, so at least some
kind of notification would be apresiated.



Den 2016-03-26 kl. 13:54, skrev Kevin Cussick via Groups.io:
no this is not a good idea, a newbey might try this feature that
you want and download a snap and it might have problems then threw
word of mouth nvda gets a bad reputation, this was asked for some
years ago and the devs gave this explanation of why it was a bad
idea I agree with them.

On 26/03/2016 03:51, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote:
I was just thinking how cool of a feature this would be, and I'd not
think it would be terribly hard either to implement.
How hard would it be from the official build, like in this case,
2016.1,
to put an option in the NVDA menu, maybe under Tools, that
automatically
like downloading updates would let the user download and install the
latest snapshot build rather than them having to go out to the web
site
and manually get it. Either that, or maybe under the General tab of
preferences, where you have the box to check or uncheck for
checking for
updates, maybe have another one that says download snapshot builds
when
updating.
What do you all think?
---
Christopher Gilland
JAWS Certified, 2016.
Training Instructor.
@AHeart4God316 <mailto:@AHeart4God316>
Phone: (704) 256-8010 Extension 401.





Join nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.