View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0005604SUMoBugpublic2019-07-29 19:02
Reporterwolf Assigned ToKyle_Katarn  
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityhave not tried
Status acknowledgedResolutionopen 
OSWindows 10 64-bitOS Version1809 
Product Version5.9.4 
Target VersionShort term 
Summary0005604: fix silent rewrite of skip list
DescriptionWith the latest preview of Windows 10 2003 edition installed by sufficient number of SUMo users, my SUMo report list suddendly switched by increasing the outdated count by about 1500 records. I can't judge if this includes also released or preview updates of .NET and Microsoft Office as I don't have a full Microsoft Office installation on my notebook. As SUMo ignore list doesn't provide the desired handling and never will do so, I tried the SUMo ignore list as a work around. I didn't finish processing my about 1200 entries to move of report list to skip list. And I find this doesn't do what I want neither. It shows other problems.

First, I moved about 200 entries of components of the Windows operating system with announced target version of Windows 10 2003 preview edition to skip permanently and perhaps 20 entries with target version of Windows 10 1903 to skip for a month. Then I interrupted this processing to see what the skip list looks like. And I saw just a few entries, two for those Windows operating system components It didn't register of which version to do the skip, only the target version. This is not what I want. But it is acceptable too. But what astonished me is that the entry in the skip list which should read permanent skip for preview of Windows 10 2003 edition was marked with skipping for a month while the entry with target version of the release of Windows 10 1903 to skip for a month reads as skipping permanently. Why?
How is this possible?
Why was this switched the other way round then specified by my skip action?

So I removed those two entries and repeated it the processing. This time, I selected the Windows operating system components of target version Windows 10 2003 preview edition to be skipped permanently and the Internet Explorer components of target version Windows 10 1903 release to skip for a month. What I read now is no entry at all for Windows 10 2003 in the skip list, instead an entry not specified for Windows 10 1903 release for Windows components to be skipped permanently, and Internet Explorer and IIS service components read as specified! See atached screen shot. What happens here with the entries for Windows components of those target versions and editions?
Why are they rewritten differently then specified?
Why does a target version appear which wasn't specified and with an unacceptable time limit which was specified for a different target version while the non-specified target version should get a months time to skip but SUMo couldn't know as not selected nor specified?

Additional InformationMicrosoft doesn't provide yet an update to Windows 10 1903 for my notebook (as opposed to my other Windows 10 devices). Microsoft warned me to update manually to Windows 10 1903. Microsoft warned me to reinstall Windows 10 with the 1903 edition too. It promised me that I'll ran into several inacceptable issues. But SUMo claims that various files of Windows are available for my notebook with Windows 10 1903, 1910 and 2003 edition. The youngest 2003 preview has been released about two weeks ago and there are sufficient SUMo users with that preview installed so that SUMo proposes me these as current update for my notebook, in opposition to Microsofts claims!

I don't know after how much time another SUMo user deinstalled his Windows 10 2003 preview of this spring. It was something like at least 3-4 weeks that this preview was in use by at least one SUMo user and SUMo declaring this alpha preview as current and released! I can't tell for the 1903 previews because I activated Microsoft reporting in SUMo almost a month before the final release.
TagsNo tags attached.


related to 0005595 feedbackKyle_Katarn fix silent skip of ignore list handling 



2019-07-28 00:32

reporter   ~0003636

When resuming the processing of SUMo report list for Windows operating system components and existing update to version 10 2003 preview, I tried to recheck the selection before adding to skip list. This time this preview version vanished by this rescan receiving various target version, none larger then Windows 10 1809. So no need anymore to put on the ignore list.


2019-07-28 12:22

administrator   ~0003637

"Then I interrupted this processing to see what the skip list looks like" : what do you mean ? Resetting the skipped items list ?


2019-07-28 22:13

reporter   ~0003640

No. I didn't use the reset action of the skip list editor.

When I wrote of interrupting this processing, I didn't refer to any SUMo action to interrupt. I referred to my action to move those probably about 1200 entries of the SUMo report list to the SUMo skip list. This processing consists of repeatedly looking at sections of reported outdated entries and to select candidates for moving to skip list and the request this skip action (via context menu) for the subset of selected candidates of the report list.

Due to this interruption I learned that those selected entries will not be removed of the report list but instead handled differently although their current version is not recorded for this choice but instead solely their proposed target version. This observation lets me expect much less entries on the skip list as processed. This was also my observation. So the first trial of moving processed more than 200 entries of the report list and created about 5 entries on the skip list while modifying those 200 processed entries.

This issue here was first based on the reported update versions of the report list. This requires some level of trust and reliability of those entries and versions in the report list. As the skip list records that target version and some selectable period, I expect those seen in the report list and skip dialog to be placed in the skip list. But that is not what happens. It did change the update version AND the selected period WITHOUT informing me about that fact.

In the 2nd trial, this change was much clearer as the selected base was less varied.

In the 3rd trial (found in my previous note), I entered another between selection for skip action and starting the skip action dialogue. This idea came to me as a consequence of reading your email reply on HPWSD seemingly unrelated. And I didn't understand all of your email, especially one term.

These 3 trials revealed that my choice of base was inappropriate for that action. SUMo is not yet reliable enough for those candidates to provide enough trust and reliability. Hopefully this will change with my issue and some other improvement proposals.

I don't know which parts of information of a selection of the report list are taken by the skip action dialog (when asking how long to skip), expecting to take all fields that will be recorded in the skip list later. My interruption and check showed me that either the skip action dialog or the skip action processing (most probably this skip action processing) doesn't use the selected reported update target version but instead seems to query SUMo server again and processing with that result WITHOUT informing the SUMo user if this SUMo server contact resulted in a DIFFERENT update version. And it seems that if this target update version has changed due to repeated SUMo server query, it will not only silently replace the target update version but also the skip period TOO WITHOUT informing.

I don't see any need for SUMo server query for that kind of local SUMo action. So is my impression correct of doing such a SUMo server query anyway?
And does such a query happen before processing the report list or between report list processing and skip list processing?

I consider it a bad idea to continue processing automatically if the selected data has changed (without SUMo user interaction). It should instead inform the SUMo user and propose to abort the selected action (or request confirmation to proceed anyway, with either selected original data or with changed data). My action request was based on the selected data, not on changed data never displayed before nor inbetween. So I don't want to proceed with changed data. I only want to proceed with selected and unchanged data.


2019-07-29 19:02

administrator   ~0003644

OK, I understand the use case.
No easy option up to now with current design, except with a very burden play with excluded folders... I'll have to think about the best way to manage this !

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2019-07-28 00:09 wolf New Issue
2019-07-28 00:09 wolf Issue generated from: 0005595
2019-07-28 00:09 wolf Relationship added related to 0005595
2019-07-28 00:32 wolf Note Added: 0003636
2019-07-28 12:22 Kyle_Katarn Note Added: 0003637
2019-07-28 12:23 Kyle_Katarn Assigned To => Kyle_Katarn
2019-07-28 12:23 Kyle_Katarn Status new => feedback
2019-07-28 22:13 wolf Note Added: 0003640
2019-07-29 19:02 Kyle_Katarn Note Added: 0003644
2019-07-29 19:02 Kyle_Katarn Status feedback => acknowledged
2019-07-29 19:02 Kyle_Katarn Target Version => Short term