So serious question. What is the update component doing that JUpdater and by proxy JHttp aren't? Because the CMS packages are here on GitHub too and unless the component is configuring cURL differently than JHttp is, both would hit the same error.

And as far as the error text is concerned... Well, that leaves a lot to be desired. Why did it fail? What am I supposed to do with this link you're giving me? Can you give me a way to get more details about the error if you aren't going to display anything useful in the UI (in this state, we just throw away the error with no apparent logging mechanism around it, not very useful for troubleshooting)?

Just throwing ideas around. Nobody come at me with a pitchfork please.

I agree with @mbabker about the text and I dont see the reason for making
it a link. What is the purpose?

NOTE: We have had other reports of this type of thing before from 3pd. The
last one was iirc from @jceeditor

On 27 July 2015 at 21:46, Michael Babker notifications@github.com wrote:

And as far as the error text is concerned... Well, that leaves a lot to be
desired. Why did it fail? What am I supposed to do with this link you're
giving me? Can you give me a way to get more details about the error if you
aren't going to display anything useful in the UI (in this state, we just
throw away the error with no apparent logging mechanism around it, not very
useful for troubleshooting)?

Just throwing ideas around. Nobody come at me with a pitchfork please.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#7570 (comment).

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

And as far as the error text is concerned... Well, that leaves a lot to be desired. Why did it fail? What am I supposed to do with this link you're giving me? Can you give me a way to get more details about the error if you aren't going to display anything useful in the UI (in this state, we just throw away the error with no apparent logging mechanism around it, not very useful for troubleshooting)?

I'm not sure I understand. The reason why it failed is written in the yellow warning above the red error text. Granted, it's quite technical but it's a accurate information there, if you understand it. It should also end up in the log, if you set the log up to catch those messages.

Unfortunately, the red error message may be due to any reason, and we don't have an easy way to detect the error and adjust the error message. They are generated at different places in code.

I dont see the reason for making it a link. What is the purpose?

Just to make it simpler for the user to download the package manually and install it using the Installer. Instead of copy-pasting the url, he can click it directly. I thought that would be a bit more intuitive for the user. They tend to click links if presented :)
And if the message could be reworded clever, they would even get that they can install that package they just downloaded

So serious question. What is the update component doing that JUpdater and by proxy JHttp aren't? Because the CMS packages are here on GitHub too and unless the component is configuring cURL differently than JHttp is, both would hit the same error.

Good question! Someone knows how the update component works?

From looking at com_joomlaupdate, it doesn't use JHttp like the extension updater. It uses AdmintoolsHelperDownload::download(). And there it sets CURLOPT_SSL_VERIFYPEER to false, which of course makes it work (the root cert isn't checked and thus doesn't fail), but nullifies an important part of the point of SSL.

I'm not sure I understand. The reason why it failed is written in the yellow warning above the red error text. Granted, it's quite technical but it's a accurate information there, if you understand it. It should also end up in the log, if you set the log up to catch those messages.

At first it seemed like you were changing the whole error block to just use that red screen cap only. OK, now that that's clarified...

Just to make it simpler for the user to download the package manually and install it using the Installer. Instead of copy-pasting the url, he can click it directly. I thought that would be a bit more intuitive for the user. They tend to click links if presented :)
And if the message could be reworded clever, they would even get that they can install that package they just downloaded

It still tells the user absolutely nothing. What's the purpose of giving them that URL? Is it a link they're supposed to click or just some fancy error message? If anything, just changing it to a link with no supplementary information is even more confusing than it is now.

Agreed - I made the same assumption about the message

On 28 July 2015 at 13:44, Michael Babker notifications@github.com wrote:

I'm not sure I understand. The reason why it failed is written in the
yellow warning above the red error text. Granted, it's quite technical but
it's a accurate information there, if you understand it. It should also end
up in the log, if you set the log up to catch those messages.

At first it seemed like you were changing the whole error block to just
use that red screen cap only. OK, now that that's clarified...

Just to make it simpler for the user to download the package manually and
install it using the Installer. Instead of copy-pasting the url, he can
click it directly. I thought that would be a bit more intuitive for the
user. They tend to click links if presented :)
And if the message could be reworded clever, they would even get that they
can install that package they just downloaded [image: ]

It still tells the user absolutely nothing. What's the purpose of giving
them that URL? Is it a link they're supposed to click or just some fancy
error message? If anything, just changing it to a link with no
supplementary information is even more confusing than it is now.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#7570 (comment).

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

At first it seemed like you were changing the whole error block to just use that red screen cap only. OK, now that that's clarified...

Ah, no. That would indeed be stupid

It still tells the user absolutely nothing. What's the purpose of giving them that URL? Is it a link they're supposed to click or just some fancy error message? If anything, just changing it to a link with no supplementary information is even more confusing than it is now.

That's why I thought to expand that error message with an additional text. But wanted some input how to word it as I didn't come up with something that sounds halfway like proper english.

Sorry for not being clear enough then. I'm only changing the URL in the red error message to be a clickable link. The rest remains untouched.

So how about instead of

Package download failed link

change it to

Failed to download package from link

Would at least be more clear to me what that link is doing there
I think best would be if we can tell the user that he can try to download and install it manually. To give them a hint how to proceed further.

Failed to download package. Download it and install manually from link

On 28 July 2015 at 14:05, Thomas Hunziker notifications@github.com wrote:

Would at least be more clear to me what that link is doing there [image:
]
I think best would be if we can tell the user that he can try to download
and install it manually. To give them a hint how to proceed further.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#7570 (comment).

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

Rather: "Failed to download package. Download it from link and install manually"
as, I guess, installing from link in Extensions->installer would get the same issue.

Installing from link will hit the same issue as the CMS will try to download the package from the upstream provider and hit the same SSL error. A user who hits this error HAS to download the package to their local PC and install in the extension manager that way.

Updated with the suggestion from Brian.
Looks like this now:

Merged by review. Thank you @Bakual!