{"action":"reopened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/NAVADMC/ADSM/issues/476","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/NAVADMC/ADSM/issues/476/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/NAVADMC/ADSM/issues/476/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/NAVADMC/ADSM/issues/476/events","html_url":"https://github.com/NAVADMC/ADSM/issues/476","id":66626133,"number":476,"title":"Program update process","user":{"login":"casesp","id":6764142,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/6764142?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp","html_url":"https://github.com/casesp","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/casesp/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/NAVADMC/ADSM/labels/duplicate","name":"duplicate","color":"cccccc"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":2,"created_at":"2015-04-06T15:12:09Z","updated_at":"2015-06-04T12:47:07Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Issue:  The current program update methodology needs reworked\r\n\r\nExplanation:\r\n\r\nWhen epidemiologists use the software for research, they need to be absolutely certain that the entire software suite is identical throughout the entire research project.  Any models created and simulations run must be done so with the exact same code.  To do otherwise invalidates their study results, according to proper scientific method.\r\n\r\nHaving the ability to update the software by clicking on the \"check updates\" button, especially when it isn't working solidly and the program gives no real or standard indication of its current version, could put research and reputation in jeopardy.\r\n\r\nSuggestions:\r\n1)  During program startup the current version (all of the information relating to that version, i.e. build number, version number, and whatever that hexadecimal number stands for.  And for each component, i.e. the GUI and the CEngine) should be displayed clearly in a startup box or window.\r\n2)  The current adsm.exe program needs to start making use of Windows programming standards.  It needs to, and can, popup message boxes and give user feedback other than a long stream of seemingly meaningless debug messages that scroll off the screen.\r\n3)  The program update process should be as it was before.  The user should be required to go to the website and download a new version.  This makes it a very deliberate act, and provides the user with several advantages:\r\n     a)  The user can run several different versions at the same time on their machine and be absolutely certain of what each version is and is not.\r\n     b)  Assures the user that they have not invalidated their study research by accidentally mixing measurement tools mid-study.\r\n     c)  Assures the user that the update process works as expected and does not have any unknown quirks, as experienced by me in the testing process.\r\n\r\n"}}