[Mageia-dev] FireFox ESR <= we should totally go for this wrt stable releases

Fri Jan 13 23:58:16 CET 2012

Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 23:10:53 schreef Jeff Robins:
+> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Maarten Vanraes <alien at rmail.be> wrote:
+> > Op vrijdag 13 januari 2012 20:59:19 schreef Jeff Robins:
+> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM, andre999 <andre999mga at laposte.net>
+> > 
+> > wrote:
+> > > > Wait.
+> > > > A long-term release version is kept updated for bugs, particularly
+> > > > security bugs, but doesn't add new features.
+> > > > Since it doesn't add new features, it is less likely to introduce new
+> > > > bugs, and so would be more secure.
+> > > > (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.)
+> > > > 
+> > > > So if you want a stable, secure browser, prefer among Mozilla
+> > > > browsers the Firefox long-term release, or for more stable,
+> > > > Seamonkey.
+> > > > 
+> > > > 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.)
+> > > > Upstream Firefox by default warns when the latest update is
+> > > > available.
+> > > > 
+> > > > --
+> > > > André
+> > > 
+> > > I think 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.  (
+> > 
+> > http://www.anandtech.com/show/5378/mozilla-announces-firefox-extended-sup
+> > po
+> > 
+> > > rt-release )
+> > > 
+> > > 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.
+> > > (
+> > 
+> > http://letsbytecode.com/general/10-firefox-will-be-updated-on-the-quiet/)
+> > 
+> > > 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.
+> > > 
+> > > --Jeff
+> > 
+> > look at the picture for the support period, the 1y warranteed versions
+> > cross
+> > over for 2 or 3 months
+> > 
+> > so it's going to fit for as long as we have 9m release schedule
+> 
+> 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:
+> 
+> Jan 2012 (good):
+> We do long-term 1 and Mozilla does ESR1.
+> 
+> Sept 2012(good):
+> We do long-term 2 and Mozilla has just released FF ESR2.
+> 
+> June 2013(bad):
+> 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.
+> 
+> March 2014(good):
+> 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.
+> 
+> --Jeff
+
+
+"your logic is flawed"
+
+
+we have version freeze and testing several months before release
+
+
+so, let's say mga2 ships with FF10.
+
+if mga2 is release june, mga3 would be march 2013, with FF17.
+
+mga4 would be released around dec 2013, with FF24
+mga5 would be released with FF33, etc..
+
+HOWEVER!
+
+mga1 continues support until at least release of mga3, and thus will also 
+carry FF10.
+
+mga2 has the same thing, when FF10 becomes EOL, mga2 will have to "update" to 
+FF17 as well... AND in advance of release of the new versions.
+
+but otoh, this is all speculation on the continuation of 9m release schedule, 
+and if it's strictly adhered or not, and if FF isn't going to deviate or 
+change...
+
+this is well enough in advance thinking imho, no need to think further than 
+this.
+
+first we should also note if WE ourselves need to have LTS versions and IF we 
+can support that... etc...
+
+in short, due to 3month overlap, the FF ERS cycle is 9m, just like mageia...
+