summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011331.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011331.html')
-rw-r--r--zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011331.html164
1 files changed, 164 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011331.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011331.html
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..d93e4386f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011331.html
@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
+<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
+<HTML>
+ <HEAD>
+ <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR &lt;= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
+ </TITLE>
+ <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
+ <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20FireFox%20ESR%20%3C%3D%20we%20should%20totally%20go%20for%20this%20wrt%0A%20stable%20releases&In-Reply-To=%3C4F10193C.4060106%40gmail.com%3E">
+ <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
+ <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
+ <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="011330.html">
+ <LINK REL="Next" HREF="011334.html">
+ </HEAD>
+ <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
+ <H1>[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR &lt;= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases</H1>
+ <B>Claire Robinson</B>
+ <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20FireFox%20ESR%20%3C%3D%20we%20should%20totally%20go%20for%20this%20wrt%0A%20stable%20releases&In-Reply-To=%3C4F10193C.4060106%40gmail.com%3E"
+ TITLE="[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR &lt;= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases">eeeemail at gmail.com
+ </A><BR>
+ <I>Fri Jan 13 12:45:00 CET 2012</I>
+ <P><UL>
+ <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="011330.html">[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR &lt;= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
+</A></li>
+ <LI>Next message: <A HREF="011334.html">[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR &lt;= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
+</A></li>
+ <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
+ <a href="date.html#11331">[ date ]</a>
+ <a href="thread.html#11331">[ thread ]</a>
+ <a href="subject.html#11331">[ subject ]</a>
+ <a href="author.html#11331">[ author ]</a>
+ </LI>
+ </UL>
+ <HR>
+<!--beginarticle-->
+<PRE>On 13/01/12 11:37, Michael Scherer wrote:
+&gt;<i> Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 &#224; 11:21 +0000, Claire Robinson a &#233;crit :
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote:
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote:
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas:
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> see <A HREF="https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-">https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-</A>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> extended-support-release/
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> see <A HREF="https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png">https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png</A>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> ESR is a 1y extended supported release...
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month release
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> FF11 for our release.
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> chance!
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> regular releases... )
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer?
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer.
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> Why not?
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> main problem goes away).
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule).
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> * We will miss too many new and cool features.
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> * When we release
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;<i> reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version.
+</I>&gt;&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway.
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> with.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non
+</I>&gt;<i> technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not
+</I>&gt;<i> know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it
+</I>&gt;<i> up to date, so firefox is nothing special.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel.
+</I>&gt;<i> Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ).
+</I>&gt;<i> So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6
+</I>&gt;<i> weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string
+</I>&gt;<i> change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or
+</I>&gt;&gt;<i> maybe even offer both?
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> Offering both would mean to double our workload of supporting firefox,
+</I>&gt;<i> and have no advantages by using the long supported release.
+</I>&gt;<i>
+</I>&gt;<i> And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to
+</I>&gt;<i> reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the
+</I>&gt;<i> distribution.
+</I>
+My meaning was that it isn't just general software. As I said, it is one
+of those packages that reviewers quote version numbers and users expect
+to be updated.
+
+IMO we should be on the latest version but I really do understand the
+arguments against it so I understand why you disagree :)
+</PRE>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<!--endarticle-->
+ <HR>
+ <P><UL>
+ <!--threads-->
+ <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="011330.html">[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR &lt;= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
+</A></li>
+ <LI>Next message: <A HREF="011334.html">[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR &lt;= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases
+</A></li>
+ <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
+ <a href="date.html#11331">[ date ]</a>
+ <a href="thread.html#11331">[ thread ]</a>
+ <a href="subject.html#11331">[ subject ]</a>
+ <a href="author.html#11331">[ author ]</a>
+ </LI>
+ </UL>
+
+<hr>
+<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
+mailing list</a><br>
+</body></html>