1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] [RPM] cauldron core/release firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20%5BRPM%5D%20cauldron%20core/release%0A%09firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2&In-Reply-To=%3C201108261722.11516.maarten.vanraes%40gmail.com%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="007558.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="007566.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] [RPM] cauldron core/release firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2</H1>
<B>Maarten Vanraes</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20%5BRPM%5D%20cauldron%20core/release%0A%09firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2&In-Reply-To=%3C201108261722.11516.maarten.vanraes%40gmail.com%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] [RPM] cauldron core/release firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2">maarten.vanraes at gmail.com
</A><BR>
<I>Fri Aug 26 17:22:11 CEST 2011</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="007558.html">[Mageia-dev] [RPM] cauldron core/release firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="007566.html">[Mageia-dev] [RPM] cauldron core/release firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#7565">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#7565">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#7565">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#7565">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>Op vrijdag 26 augustus 2011 09:56:43 schreef Florian Hubold:
><i> Am 26.08.2011 09:50, schrieb Sander Lepik:
</I>><i> > 26.08.2011 10:27, Guillaume Rousse kirjutas:
</I>><i> >> I don't see where it is stated than firefox can't get updated until all
</I>><i> >> extensions in the distributions work with it.
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > I would call it a regression that shouldn't pass QA. One day your ads
</I>><i> > ands scripts are blocked and the other day they are not. Great user
</I>><i> > experience..
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> >> The large advantage of packaged extensions is that they are managed by
</I>><i> >> sysadmins, instead of users, which makes a difference when they are
</I>><i> >> different people.
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > And even larger disadvantage comes in when they are not updated. Contain
</I>><i> > memory leaks and so on. The biggest problem here is that the packager who
</I>><i> > imported those addons is not keeping them up-to-date.
</I>><i> >
</I>><i> > Sysadmin can copy those extensions into place anyway. Then it's up to
</I>><i> > him/her to keep them up-to-date. Currently we have to take care of that
</I>><i> > and we don't (or if anyone wants to claim that we do then we do it
</I>><i> > really poorly as there are already newer versions of addons that got
</I>><i> > pushed with latest update).
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Well, as there are mostly no bigger changes like in %files, can't an update
</I>><i> of those addons
</I>><i> be scripted or automated halfway? So someone just needs to push this prior
</I>><i> to a Firefox update?
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Not saying i have an opinion pro or against packaged addons, but it is
</I>><i> really a nuisance
</I>><i> as those who do the Firefox update also need to update all those addons,
</I>><i> which is unfair,
</I>><i> seems to me if it's not the importer/maintainer of those addons who does
</I>><i> the update.
</I>
well, regardless of what we do, we should update all the packages requiring
any package to be sure they are working/updated, before the actual push from
testing to updates, imho.
in fact, i think updates should be blocked from pushing until all packages
dependant on it or also working or updated for it. perhaps if such an addon
package is badly maintained, it should be dropped; if not, perhaps the move
from testing to updates can wait one more day...?
one could argue that if it's a security fix, it should not have to wait, but
then one could argue that certain plugins increase security and thus those
should definately be working before the move from testing to updates. so i
guess i would call this "maintainers privilege". none the less, if this is
chosen, the others should follow quickly or maybe they aren't maintained well,
so they could be dropped.
for cauldron, there is no such need.
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="007558.html">[Mageia-dev] [RPM] cauldron core/release firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="007566.html">[Mageia-dev] [RPM] cauldron core/release firefox-ext-add-on-compatibility-reporter-0.9-1.mga2
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#7565">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#7565">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#7565">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#7565">[ 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>
|
