diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011335.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011335.html | 206 |
1 files changed, 206 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011335.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011335.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b8b9fa459 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-January/011335.html @@ -0,0 +1,206 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= 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=%3C4F103157.8090008%40laposte.net%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="011356.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="011322.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases</H1> + <B>andre999</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=%3C4F103157.8090008%40laposte.net%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases">andre999mga at laposte.net + </A><BR> + <I>Fri Jan 13 14:27:51 CET 2012</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="011356.html">[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="011322.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] 1 core/updates_testing lives-1.4.9-1.mga1 +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#11335">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#11335">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#11335">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#11335">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>Michael Scherer a écrit : +><i> Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +0000, Claire Robinson a écrit : +</I>><i> +</I>>><i> On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote: +</I>>><i> +</I>>>><i> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote: +</I>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> +</I>>>>><i> 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas: +</I>>>>><i> +</I>>>>>><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>>>>>><i> extended-support-release/ +</I>>>>>><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>>>>>><i> +</I>>>>>><i> ESR is a 1y extended supported release... +</I>>>>>><i> +</I>>>>>><i> looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month release +</I>>>>>><i> schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards +</I>>>>>><i> FF11 for our release. +</I>>>>>><i> +</I>>>>>><i> We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our +</I>>>>>><i> chance! +</I>>>>>><i> +</I>>>>>><i> ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the +</I>>>>>><i> regular releases... ) +</I>>>>>><i> +</I>>>>>><i> i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer? +</I>>>>>><i> +</I> +I'd say let's go for the long-term release, and let those wanting the +latest and greatest use the upstream version. + +1) Upstream will release probably at least a week before we could +release it as an update. With a 6-week release cycle, we will always be +lagging. + +2) Mozilla (Firefox/Seamonkey/Thunderbird) is very conservative in their +requires, and their rpm for mdv (and thus mga) menus are well done, so +newer upstream versions are highly unlikely to have any problems on install. +(Note that upstream Mozilla required libstdc++5 long after mdv had +migrated to libstdc++6 and had later dropped libstdc++5.) + +>>>><i> I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer. +</I>>>>><i> +</I>>>>><i> Why not? +</I>>>>><i> * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our +</I>>>>><i> main problem goes away). +</I>>>>><i> * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower +</I>>>>><i> popularity for Mageia. (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule). +</I>>>>><i> * We will miss too many new and cool features. +</I>>>>><i> * When we release +</I>>>>><i> +</I>>>><i> We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception +</I>>>><i> on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no +</I>>>><i> reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version. +</I>>>><i> +</I> +Exactly. The fewer such exceptions the better, where alternatives exist. + +>><i> With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the +</I>>><i> lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway. +</I>>><i> +</I> +Sure, but not every 6 weeks whether there is a bug fix or not. +On the average in the last few years, significant bug fixes in +Firefox/Seamonkey have been more like every 2 or 3 months. + +>><i> Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date +</I>>><i> with. +</I>>><i> +</I>><i> All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non +</I>><i> technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not +</I>><i> know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it +</I>><i> up to date, so firefox is nothing special. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> +</I>>><i> It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something +</I>>><i> reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome. +</I>>><i> +</I> +We will always be at least a week behind Firefox's latest release. +So where do you think those really wanting the "latest and greatest" +will go ? + +><i> Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel. +</I>><i> Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ). +</I>><i> So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6 +</I>><i> weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string +</I>><i> change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates. +</I>><i> +</I> ++1 + +>><i> I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think +</I>>><i> for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or +</I>>><i> maybe even offer both? +</I>>><i> +</I>><i> Offering both would mean to double our workload of supporting firefox, +</I>><i> and have no advantages by using the long supported release. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to +</I>><i> reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the +</I>><i> distribution. +</I>><i> +</I> +-- + +André + +</PRE> + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="011356.html">[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="011322.html">[Mageia-dev] [changelog] [RPM] 1 core/updates_testing lives-1.4.9-1.mga1 +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#11335">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#11335">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#11335">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#11335">[ 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> |