diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113')
10 files changed, 210 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/0247fcec/attachment-0001.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/0247fcec/attachment-0001.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7153c5776 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/0247fcec/attachment-0001.html @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ +<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div><span><br></span></div><div><br></div> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir="ltr"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Claire Robinson <eeeemail@gmail.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> mageia-dev@mageia.org <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Friday, January 13, 2012 6:45 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases<br> </font> </div> <br> +On 13/01/12 11:37, Michael Scherer wrote:<br>> Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +0000, Claire Robinson a écrit :<br>>> On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote:<br>>>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote:<br>>>><br>>>>> 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas:<br>>>>>> see <a href="https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-" target="_blank">https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-</a><br>>>>>> extended-support-release/<br>>>>>> see <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png" target="_blank">https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png</a><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> ESR is a 1y extended supported release...<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month + release<br>>>>>> schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards<br>>>>>> FF11 for our release.<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our<br>>>>>> chance!<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the<br>>>>>> regular releases... )<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer?<br>>>>> I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer.<br>>>>><br>>>>> Why not?<br>>>>> * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our<br>>>>> main problem goes away).<br>>>>> * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower<br>>>>> popularity for Mageia. + (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule).<br>>>>> * We will miss too many new and cool features.<br>>>>> * When we release<br>>>><br>>>> We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception<br>>>> on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no<br>>>> reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version.<br>>>><br>>><br>>> With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the<br>>> lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway.<br>>><br>>> Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date<br>>> with.<br>><br>> All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non<br>> technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not<br>> know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it<br>> up to + date, so firefox is nothing special.<br>><br>>> It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something<br>>> reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome.<br>><br>> Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel.<br>> Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ).<br>> So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users.<br>><br>> Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6<br>> weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string<br>> change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates.<br>><br>>> I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think<br>>> for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or<br>>> maybe even offer both?<br>><br>> Offering both would mean to double our workload + of supporting firefox,<br>> and have no advantages by using the long supported release.<br>><br>> And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to<br>> reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the<br>> distribution.<br><br>My meaning was that it isn't just general software. As I said, it is one <br>of those packages that reviewers quote version numbers and users expect <br>to be updated.<br><br>IMO we should be on the latest version but I really do understand the <br>arguments against it so I understand why you disagree :)<br><br>This really doesn't make sense. The browser is our interface to the internet. I (as a user) feel a need to have the latest version of my browser complete with all security patches. I really couldn't care less if I have the latest gnome or kde. Surfing the net using a browser with known security issues bothers me. I think this is why so many people consider firefox to be an + exception to the rule. Where most software that is older is considered to be more stable, when talking about a browser it is generally the opposite. It would be nice to at least give the users a choice, maybe have the LTR version as well as the latest release available. I have seen other distros provide chrome stable, testing, and unstable. Allowing the user to choose which version they are most comfortable with. <br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> </div> </div> </div></body></html>
\ No newline at end of file diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/0247fcec/attachment.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/0247fcec/attachment.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7153c5776 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/0247fcec/attachment.html @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ +<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div><span><br></span></div><div><br></div> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir="ltr"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Claire Robinson <eeeemail@gmail.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> mageia-dev@mageia.org <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Friday, January 13, 2012 6:45 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases<br> </font> </div> <br> +On 13/01/12 11:37, Michael Scherer wrote:<br>> Le vendredi 13 janvier 2012 à 11:21 +0000, Claire Robinson a écrit :<br>>> On 13/01/12 09:36, nicolas vigier wrote:<br>>>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Sander Lepik wrote:<br>>>><br>>>>> 13.01.2012 03:20, Maarten Vanraes kirjutas:<br>>>>>> see <a href="https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-" target="_blank">https://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-</a><br>>>>>> extended-support-release/<br>>>>>> see <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png" target="_blank">https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/9/9d/Esr-release-overview.png</a><br>>>>>><br>>>>>> ESR is a 1y extended supported release...<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> looking at the image we'd be having supported versions for our 9month + release<br>>>>>> schedule every time... we should totally use this release and not go towards<br>>>>>> FF11 for our release.<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> We've been complaining about the too quick release schedule... this is our<br>>>>>> chance!<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> ( i think if the FF maintainer wishes, he could also do backports of the<br>>>>>> regular releases... )<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> i'm hoping everyone agrees? including FF maintainer?<br>>>>> I don't agree. But i'm not the maintainer.<br>>>>><br>>>>> Why not?<br>>>>> * Since fx10 all non-binary extensions are compatible by default (so our<br>>>>> main problem goes away).<br>>>>> * fx10 in 6 months is dead old for users POV. Many unhappy users. Lower<br>>>>> popularity for Mageia. + (Ubuntu AFAIK is going with fast schedule).<br>>>>> * We will miss too many new and cool features.<br>>>>> * When we release<br>>>><br>>>> We could say the same about any other software. Firefox was an exception<br>>>> on updates policy because there was no other choice. But there's no<br>>>> reason to keep it as an exception when they provide a supported version.<br>>>><br>>><br>>> With 12 months support more often than not it would need updating in the<br>>> lifespan of the Mageia 9 month release anyway.<br>>><br>>> Firefox is one of those programs that people like to be bang up to date<br>>> with.<br>><br>> All softwares are one of those programs. The only one that some non<br>> technical users do not want to be updated are those that they do not<br>> know, like glibc, python, perl. But still, there is people that want it<br>> up to + date, so firefox is nothing special.<br>><br>>> It is 'bragging rights' to ship with the latest and something<br>>> reviewers always give version numbers of along with libreoffice, kde, gnome.<br>><br>> Sure, and we neither update libreoffice, kde, gnome or the linux kernel.<br>> Some people do ( kde is upated by Fedora, as well as the linux kernel ).<br>> So that's a consistency issue, about what we promise to users.<br>><br>> Stability is just that, stuff that do not have interface changes every 6<br>> weeks, stuff that do not have slight mistranslation everytime string<br>> change, stuff that do not risk breaking software after every updates.<br>><br>>> I understand the arguments to go with the 12 months support but I think<br>>> for the reasons above we should stick with the normal release cycle or<br>>> maybe even offer both?<br>><br>> Offering both would mean to double our workload + of supporting firefox,<br>> and have no advantages by using the long supported release.<br>><br>> And that's rather useless from my point of view, if the goal is to<br>> reduce the workload. There is already enough work to support the<br>> distribution.<br><br>My meaning was that it isn't just general software. As I said, it is one <br>of those packages that reviewers quote version numbers and users expect <br>to be updated.<br><br>IMO we should be on the latest version but I really do understand the <br>arguments against it so I understand why you disagree :)<br><br>This really doesn't make sense. The browser is our interface to the internet. I (as a user) feel a need to have the latest version of my browser complete with all security patches. I really couldn't care less if I have the latest gnome or kde. Surfing the net using a browser with known security issues bothers me. I think this is why so many people consider firefox to be an + exception to the rule. Where most software that is older is considered to be more stable, when talking about a browser it is generally the opposite. It would be nice to at least give the users a choice, maybe have the LTR version as well as the latest release available. I have seen other distros provide chrome stable, testing, and unstable. Allowing the user to choose which version they are most comfortable with. <br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> </div> </div> </div></body></html>
\ No newline at end of file diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/3c59db45/attachment-0001.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/3c59db45/attachment-0001.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..801b5af2d --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/3c59db45/attachment-0001.html @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Maarten Vanraes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 20:59:19 schreef Jeff Robins:<br> +<div><div></div><div class="h5">> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 <<a href="mailto:andre999mga@laposte.net">andre999mga@laposte.net</a>> wrote:<br> +> > Wait.<br> +> > A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly<br> +> > security bugs, but doesn't add new features.<br> +> > Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new<br> +> > bugs, and so would be more secure.<br> +> > (That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more security<br> +> > issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new<br> +> > features.)<br> +> ><br> +> > So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla browsers<br> +> > the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, Seamonkey.<br> +> ><br> +> > For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the<br> +> > greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download the<br> +> > latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be available<br> +> > there at least a week sooner.)<br> +> > Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is available.<br> +> ><br> +> > --<br> +> > André<br> +><br> +> I think André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the requirements<br> +> for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, but<br> +> not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay<br> +> secure is invalid. (<br> +> <a href="http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-suppo" target="_blank">http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-suppo</a><br> +> rt-release )<br> +><br> +> Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox<br> +> hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the latest<br> +> can use the upstream and be automatically updated.<br> +> (<a href="http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/" target="_blank">http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/</a>)<br> +><br> +> My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is 9months<br> +> and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term release,<br> +> Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in the middle of<br> +> the second Mageia long-term release. This would create more work and a<br> +> long-term Mageia, which will have a major component update during the<br> +> long-term support period.<br> +><br> +> --Jeff<br> +<br> +</div></div>look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions cross<br> +over for 2 or 3 months<br> +<br> +so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule<br> +</blockquote></div><br><br> +The 2-3 month overlap doesn't solve our problem. Assuming that we both start on the same month of the same year, which we aren't, and call it January 2012:<br><br>Jan 2012 (good):<br>We do long-term 1 and Mozilla does ESR1.<br> +<br>Sept 2012(good):<br>We do long-term 2 and Mozilla has just released FF ESR2.<br><br>June 2013(bad):<br>We do long-term 3, but Mozilla won't release FF ESR3 until Sept 2013. FF ESR2 is defunct as of Jan 2013. We only get 3 months of support on ESR2 for long-term 3.<br> +<br>March 2014(good):<br>We do long-term 4 and Mozilla released FF ESR3 in Sept. We get support until Dec 2015, which is when we release long-term 5.<br><br>--Jeff<br> diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/3c59db45/attachment.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/3c59db45/attachment.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..801b5af2d --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/3c59db45/attachment.html @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Maarten Vanraes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 20:59:19 schreef Jeff Robins:<br> +<div><div></div><div class="h5">> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 <<a href="mailto:andre999mga@laposte.net">andre999mga@laposte.net</a>> wrote:<br> +> > Wait.<br> +> > A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly<br> +> > security bugs, but doesn't add new features.<br> +> > Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new<br> +> > bugs, and so would be more secure.<br> +> > (That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more security<br> +> > issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new<br> +> > features.)<br> +> ><br> +> > So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla browsers<br> +> > the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, Seamonkey.<br> +> ><br> +> > For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the<br> +> > greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download the<br> +> > latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be available<br> +> > there at least a week sooner.)<br> +> > Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is available.<br> +> ><br> +> > --<br> +> > André<br> +><br> +> I think André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the requirements<br> +> for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, but<br> +> not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay<br> +> secure is invalid. (<br> +> <a href="http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-suppo" target="_blank">http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-suppo</a><br> +> rt-release )<br> +><br> +> Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox<br> +> hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the latest<br> +> can use the upstream and be automatically updated.<br> +> (<a href="http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/" target="_blank">http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/</a>)<br> +><br> +> My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is 9months<br> +> and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term release,<br> +> Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in the middle of<br> +> the second Mageia long-term release. This would create more work and a<br> +> long-term Mageia, which will have a major component update during the<br> +> long-term support period.<br> +><br> +> --Jeff<br> +<br> +</div></div>look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions cross<br> +over for 2 or 3 months<br> +<br> +so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule<br> +</blockquote></div><br><br> +The 2-3 month overlap doesn't solve our problem. Assuming that we both start on the same month of the same year, which we aren't, and call it January 2012:<br><br>Jan 2012 (good):<br>We do long-term 1 and Mozilla does ESR1.<br> +<br>Sept 2012(good):<br>We do long-term 2 and Mozilla has just released FF ESR2.<br><br>June 2013(bad):<br>We do long-term 3, but Mozilla won't release FF ESR3 until Sept 2013. FF ESR2 is defunct as of Jan 2013. We only get 3 months of support on ESR2 for long-term 3.<br> +<br>March 2014(good):<br>We do long-term 4 and Mozilla released FF ESR3 in Sept. We get support until Dec 2015, which is when we release long-term 5.<br><br>--Jeff<br> diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/5317a246/attachment-0001.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/5317a246/attachment-0001.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bc1ad9492 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/5317a246/attachment-0001.html @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ +<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Maarten Vanraes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +<div><div class="h5"> +<br> +</div></div><br>"your logic is flawed"<br> +<br></blockquote><div>Yes it was. <br><br>When I read the text I was thinking of a new FF ESR every year, with an extra 2-3months of support, after the new one is released. The graphic makes it pretty clear that it's a new FF ESR every 8-9months. The sentence below is what caused my initial confusion:<br> +<br>"The ESR will be updated to a new major version about once a year . . . "<br></div></div><br>Sorry,<br><br>Jeff<br> diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/5317a246/attachment.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/5317a246/attachment.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bc1ad9492 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/5317a246/attachment.html @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ +<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Maarten Vanraes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +<div><div class="h5"> +<br> +</div></div><br>"your logic is flawed"<br> +<br></blockquote><div>Yes it was. <br><br>When I read the text I was thinking of a new FF ESR every year, with an extra 2-3months of support, after the new one is released. The graphic makes it pretty clear that it's a new FF ESR every 8-9months. The sentence below is what caused my initial confusion:<br> +<br>"The ESR will be updated to a new major version about once a year . . . "<br></div></div><br>Sorry,<br><br>Jeff<br> diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/6db14fb3/attachment-0001.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/6db14fb3/attachment-0001.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..99977fdca --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/6db14fb3/attachment-0001.html @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andre999mga@laposte.net">andre999mga@laposte.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +Wait.<br> +A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly security bugs, but doesn't add new features.<br> +Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new bugs, and so would be more secure.<br> +(That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more security issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new features.)<br> +<br> +So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla browsers the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, Seamonkey.<br> +<br> +For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download the latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be available there at least a week sooner.)<br> + +Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is available.<br><font color="#888888"> +<br> +-- <br> +André<br> +<br> +</font></blockquote></div><br>I think <font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" color="#888888">André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the requirements for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, but not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay secure is invalid. (<a href="http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-support-release">http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-support-release</a>)<br> +<br>Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the latest can use the upstream and be automatically updated.<br>(<a href="http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/">http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/</a>) <br> +<br>My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is 9months and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term release, Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in the middle of the second Mageia long-term release. This would create more work and a long-term Mageia, which will have a major component update during the long-term support period.<br> +<br>--Jeff<br></font> diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/6db14fb3/attachment.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/6db14fb3/attachment.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..99977fdca --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/6db14fb3/attachment.html @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andre999mga@laposte.net">andre999mga@laposte.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +Wait.<br> +A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly security bugs, but doesn't add new features.<br> +Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new bugs, and so would be more secure.<br> +(That is why, in case you haven't noticed, that Firefox has more security issues than Seamonkey, which is one step behind Firefox in adopting new features.)<br> +<br> +So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla browsers the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable, Seamonkey.<br> +<br> +For the minority of users who want the latest features, despite the greater risk, like the cauldron of Mozilla, it is easy to download the latest Firefox release, direct from upstream. (It will be available there at least a week sooner.)<br> + +Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is available.<br><font color="#888888"> +<br> +-- <br> +André<br> +<br> +</font></blockquote></div><br>I think <font style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" color="#888888">André is entirely correct and the ESR should meet the requirements for a long-term Mageia. The ESR will get all of the security updates, but not the new features so any argument about needing the latest to stay secure is invalid. (<a href="http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-support-release">http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-support-release</a>)<br> +<br>Also, the next upstream will be moving to quiet updates, unless Firefox hasn't been restarted in the last 12 hours. So, users that want the latest can use the upstream and be automatically updated.<br>(<a href="http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/">http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/</a>) <br> +<br>My only concern is the difference in release times. Mageia's is 9months and Mozilla is 1year. Nine months from Mageia's 1st long-term release, Mozilla will still be on the same FF, and will update FF in the middle of the second Mageia long-term release. This would create more work and a long-term Mageia, which will have a major component update during the long-term support period.<br> +<br>--Jeff<br></font> diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/942f3571/attachment-0001.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/942f3571/attachment-0001.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..57e147c6d --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/942f3571/attachment-0001.html @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Maarten Vanraes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +Op zaterdag 14 januari 2012 01:10:48 schreef Jeff Robins:<br> +<div><div></div><div class="h5">> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Maarten Vanraes <<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>> wrote:<br> +> > "your logic is flawed"<br> +> ><br> +> > Yes it was.<br> +><br> +> When I read the text I was thinking of a new FF ESR every year, with an<br> +> extra 2-3months of support, after the new one is released. The graphic<br> +> makes it pretty clear that it's a new FF ESR every 8-9months. The sentence<br> +> below is what caused my initial confusion:<br> +><br> +> "The ESR will be updated to a new major version about once a year . . . "<br> +><br> +> Sorry,<br> +><br> +> Jeff<br> +<br> +</div></div>thanks for letting me be Spock :-D<br> +</blockquote></div>Welcome<br> diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/942f3571/attachment.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/942f3571/attachment.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..57e147c6d --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/attachments/20120113/942f3571/attachment.html @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Maarten Vanraes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> +Op zaterdag 14 januari 2012 01:10:48 schreef Jeff Robins:<br> +<div><div></div><div class="h5">> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Maarten Vanraes <<a href="mailto:alien@rmail.be">alien@rmail.be</a>> wrote:<br> +> > "your logic is flawed"<br> +> ><br> +> > Yes it was.<br> +><br> +> When I read the text I was thinking of a new FF ESR every year, with an<br> +> extra 2-3months of support, after the new one is released. The graphic<br> +> makes it pretty clear that it's a new FF ESR every 8-9months. The sentence<br> +> below is what caused my initial confusion:<br> +><br> +> "The ESR will be updated to a new major version about once a year . . . "<br> +><br> +> Sorry,<br> +><br> +> Jeff<br> +<br> +</div></div>thanks for letting me be Spock :-D<br> +</blockquote></div>Welcome<br> |