# Improvement: Ask for Update Upon Closing Rather Than Opening Jabref

**URL:** <https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045>\
**Category:** Features\
**Created:** [April 28, 2020, 7:48am UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045 "2020-04-28T07:48:57Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 7\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cweickhmann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bc79bd/32.png) [@cweickhmann](https://discourse.jabref.org/u/cweickhmann)\
**Post date:** [April 28, 2020, 7:48am UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/1 "2020-04-28T07:48:57Z")

</div>

Feature: Ask the user for updates upon closing Jabref rather than upon upstart (or both).

My typical situation is: I fire up Jabref because I am looking for some paper and the update dialogue bugs me. So I click “yes, go to homepage” and forget about the open tab. A minute or two later, I found my paper and close Jabref again, totally forgetting about the uptate. So the cycle repeats.  
Being reminded of the update when my work with Jabref is _done_ rather before it starts, feels like it could be more successful.

* * *

Unfortunately, I am not yet allowed to post polls. But consider these three options on my behalf:

- I would like to have this feature, too! It fits my workflow
- No, I think it’s unnecessary and against all intuition!
- I don’t care.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![i\_ngli](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/discourse.jabref.org/i_ngli/32/677_2.png) [@i\_ngli](https://discourse.jabref.org/u/i_ngli)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2020, 3:03am UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/2 "2020-05-05T03:03:07Z")

</div>

_Poll ([view on site](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/2))_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AEgit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@AEgit](https://discourse.jabref.org/u/AEgit)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2020, 8:51am UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/3 "2020-05-05T08:51:53Z")

</div>

I think the current solution is the correct implementation since it is also used by most other software packages I know. Usually I start JabRef only once a day - at the start it totally makes sense to test whether an update is available (since the user might want to use the most up-to-date version). But after that I do not want to be bothered anymore with technicalities related to JabRef and use it for my actual work.

I don’t know of any other software that does the update check when closing the software. Furthermore, I could see this leading to new bugs. If you want to close JabRef and something is off with the update service, you might need to force-shutdown JabRef which could ultimately lead to data loss. And what if you have the autosave thread running in the background?

So, no, I would be against this change and I am in favour of keeping the current behaviour which is also in line with other software I know.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![i\_ngli](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/discourse.jabref.org/i_ngli/32/677_2.png) [@i\_ngli](https://discourse.jabref.org/u/i_ngli)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2020, 10:37am UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/4 "2020-05-05T10:37:11Z")

</div>

I personally do not mind about the issue.

However, I am interested in listing to users to consider the interests of “the user”.

What I sense here are different interests.

Would this be an acceptable “compromise” between the interests?  
add one or several “remind me later” options()? (default upon “quit” of jabref; other option “next day”).

_Poll ([view on site](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/4))_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AEgit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@AEgit](https://discourse.jabref.org/u/AEgit)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2020, 1:37pm UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/5 "2020-05-05T13:37:43Z")

</div>

Alternative option: Make it possible to turn off the updater. If people do not want to be bothered by it, they can just turn it off. I am not a big fan of this at the moment, since JabRef is under quite active development and many issues are being fixed in newer versions - but if people are really bothered by the update dialogue, this might be an option.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![i\_ngli](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/discourse.jabref.org/i_ngli/32/677_2.png) [@i\_ngli](https://discourse.jabref.org/u/i_ngli)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2020, 7:13pm UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/6 "2020-05-05T19:13:01Z")

</div>

I am not a fan of this either.

How about an option like “remind me in one month”?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AEgit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@AEgit](https://discourse.jabref.org/u/AEgit)\
**Post date:** [May 6, 2020, 2:48pm UTC](https://discourse.jabref.org/t/improvement-ask-for-update-upon-closing-rather-than-opening-jabref/2045/7 "2020-05-06T14:48:49Z")

</div>

I don’t have a strong opinion on this topic generally speaking. I just feel, that the current solution is already the best one. Yes, changes could be made and you could have additional options - but the time of the JabRef developers (as far as I can tell) is limited and they are also not getting paid when developing this application. Given these circumstances I would prefer the developers to focus on more important issues (stability, performance - there have been great improvements lately, but we can go even further with it) rather than minor ones, especially if the minor ones do not even necessarily represent a step forward. If the developers had unlimited time/money, then yes, I would also be happy to see all potential requests addressed. But since that is not the case, I think the focus should be on other things.

Having said all of this - yes, a reminder (when starting the program - not when quitting JabRef) that might only come back once a month would seem like a good suggestion (but see my points above).