Option to update existing install when updating to a patch release?

Although I can see how some people would want the option to have two different patch versions of Unity installed (both 2018.3.4 and 2018.3.5, for example), I generally just want to updating my patched version of 2018.x.y to 2018.x.z, rather than having both installed. Is there currently an option to do an in-place update of an installation to a newer patch release?

 

It's better to make a full new install of the new version and deinstall the previous one, which is nicely done by the Hub.

 

I don't personally consider it better. For me, it makes sense for major releases (like going from 2018.3 to 2019.1), but for patch releases it just adds steps for me. It would be nice if it were an option.

 

It's not a matter of consideration; it IS better.

 

In that case, I cast my vote for this worse behavior to be an option, for people like me, who prefer worse things.

 

And if problems happens in development you'll accuse Unity Technologies of incompetence?

 

I really don't understand what points you're trying to make here. First you claimed that my request was invalid because the current approach was "better", as though there is an objective "better" for every user, which is clearly not the case. Different users want different features. Now your concern is that my request is invalid because you're worried the Unity team might implement this feature wrong, and break something? That's like saying nothing else should ever be added to Unity because they might break something in the process.

Anyway, my concern is that every time I update a patch release I have to do one extra annoying step that could be automated by an option in Unity hub. My initial suggestion stated clearly that this would be an option, and not the only way that Hub would work. You're essentially arguing that if a feature isn't important to you specifically, it's not worth implementing. But, to stay on task here, feel free to argue about why you feel the existing approach is objectively better than an option for Hub to support both approaches.

 

I can see that you don't understand and, yes, there is an objective "better" way of doing things. But maybe we should ask the professionals about that, @Charles_Beauchemin, @joeksy

 

Hello APSchmidt, our goal is not to "dictate" how our customers should use the product. However, we have seen that the most used flow is to install both versions in parallel before uninstalling the first one, in order to verify that everything works fine in the new version. We will consider your suggestion and see how we can add it to the current workflows of the hub.

 

My suggestion?

I know that you don't dictate how people use your product; I just say that it's safer to make completely new installations instead of just updating an old one. Am I wrong?

 

You can be right and still be rude about it. just saying.

 

Seriously, I ended up here with the same question. I can tell you one thing, I don't know who APSchmidt is, but I would never do business with that particular individual. Wow.

I just installed Unity to start testing around, and a week later it's telling me there is a new version.. and its a point upgrade not a major. So yes, I too think it's completely ridiculous in a span of a week that I have to completely install the product twice to upgrade a minor version. Not everyone is a major studio looking to release projects on a daily basis. A simple upgrade, which every other development tool I use has (and I'm pretty sure Unity did in the past years ago when I tried it), would be nice.....AS AN OPTION for those who get engaged by flow's outside of their norm.

Good luck everyone.