[Mageia-dev] Adobe Flash player 11 Beta 1 in Cauldron

Sun Jul 17 12:49:33 CEST 2011

On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:47:09 +0200
+Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> wrote:
+
+> Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 à 10:57 +0300, Ahmad Samir a écrit :
+> > On 16 July 2011 02:57, Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> wrote:
+> > > Le vendredi 15 juillet 2011 à 11:10 +0300, Ahmad Samir a
+> > > écrit :
+> > >> Hello.
+> > >>
+> > >> As you've seen the thread, posted by Charles A Edwards,
+> > >> there's a new version of flash which has native 64bit
+> > >> support, it's still in beta but seems to work well, some
+> > >> questions:
+> > >> - Any objections about offering it in mga1?
+> > >
+> > > Yes, I do.
+> > > That's a beta, and stable is not a dumping ground for that.
+> > >
+> > 
+> > Right, let's do a head count:
+> > Mageia 64bit users who are using the 64bit Adobe Flash 11 Beta
+> > 1, please raise your hand (my hand is raised already, I've been
+> > using it for 2-3 days).
+> > 
+> > The point, if there's no other easy way to watch flash for
+> > 64bit users without jumping through hoops (using
+> > nspluginwrapper, which is occasionally problematic, or using a
+> > 32bit browser on an x86_64 system, which entails installing
+> > some more 32bit libs), there's a good chance they'll use flash
+> > 11, alpha/beta/rc is still better than the hoops.
+> > 
+> > Also we're talking about pushing it to backports, not updates.
+> 
+> I think we were all agreeing to raise confidence in backports.
+> 
+> I think we can also all agree that if Adobe say that's a beta
+> version, they are likely more knowledgeable than us about this
+> too.
+> 
+> Is the plugin supported by adobe ? Being still beta, I would say
+> it is not for now.
+> 
+> Some of us may have forgot, but they did withdraw the 64 bits
+> version plugin in the past with any communication, because it was
+> insecure and unsupported, and already a beta version.
+> 
+> We can also agree that taking the same policy regarding
+> backporting than at Mandriva will just yield the same result, ie
+> saying "it is not supported, so use it at your own risk".
+> 
+> And so, if we want to send the message "backports are supported",
+> we should just act accordingly, and not send unsupported
+> softwares to it.
+> 
+> The plugin may work fine now on the machine of everybody, it
+> would still be unsupported by adobe.
+> 
+
+If we want to send the message “backports are supported”, all we
+are actually able to guarantee is that they will be supported *by
+Mageia*. And this applies to ALL packages which originate from third
+parties, not just backports.
+
+We cannot guarantee that ANY package which is produced outside
+Mageia will continue to receive upstream support. Although it seems
+unlikely, it is entirely possible that any third party (Mozilla,
+KDE, Gnome, Adobe etc.) could close down before the EOL of the
+Mageia version in which the third party package is included.
+
+So, if someone *from Mageia* is prepared to support 64-bit Flash 11
+- including providing simple instructions for uninstalling it if it
+proves to cause problems or is a security risk - then I can see no
+reason why it should not be provided as a "supported" backport.
+
+-- 
+Margot
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
+**Otford Ducks Computers**
+We teach, you learn...
+...and, if you don't do your homework, we set the cat on you!
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+