Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

Message
Author
User avatar
DBeckett
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 3064
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#11 Postby DBeckett » Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:16 pm

Zevon wrote:The very irritating lack of TB email link clickability came with it too though. :frown:

Interesting. I've not seen that here.
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3, AMD FX-6100 hex-core, 3.3GHz, 8G, Radeon HD6570

User avatar
joany
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 6109
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:45 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#12 Postby joany » Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:25 pm

Zevon wrote: The very irritating lack of TB email link clickability came with it too though. :frown:

I believe this bug may have been confined to a certain CR package upgrade, not to the entire Mozilla line. The FF 9.0 tar-ball version didn't have this bug, nor did Stevo's most recent build:

Stevo wrote:Here are the debs only for the M8.5 builds of Firefox 9.0.1 from the same source as 8.0--they should also install in M11, but I would manually uninstall Warren's build first.

http://ubuntuone.com/4l9bom9exMSWvcP2dJlhlq

Let's see if that fixes the bug.
MX-14; 3.12-0.bpo.1-686-pae kernel using 4GB RAM
2.4GHz AMD Athlon 4600+
NVidia GeForce 6150 LE; 304.121 Display Driver
You didn't slow down because you're old; you're old because you slowed down.

User avatar
DBeckett
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 3064
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#13 Postby DBeckett » Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:50 pm

joany wrote:The FF 9.0 tar-ball version didn't have this bug, nor did Stevo's most recent build

You may be right about that. I'm using the tar-ball version.
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3, AMD FX-6100 hex-core, 3.3GHz, 8G, Radeon HD6570

User avatar
GoManutd
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:06 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#14 Postby GoManutd » Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:34 am

just announced... mozilla has drafted a proposal for an extended release version of firefox. it's targetted at institutions, e.g. corporations, universities, etc. (managed environs), that would otherwise not utilize a rapid release version

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Enterprise/Fir ... t:Proposal

User avatar
joany
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 6109
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:45 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#15 Postby joany » Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:15 pm

GoManutd wrote:just announced... mozilla has drafted a proposal for an extended release version of firefox. it's targetted at institutions, e.g. corporations, universities, etc. (managed environs), that would otherwise not utilize a rapid release version

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Enterprise/Fir ... t:Proposal

I don't see any difference between installing an "Extended Release" and simply not upgrading.

Over time, and ESR will be less secure than the regular release of Firefox, as new functionality will not be added at the same pace as Firefox, and only high-risk/impact security patches will be backported. It is important that organizations deploying this software understand and accept this.


I haven't seen any noticeable improvements in speed, performance, or features in the last 5 releases, so the "new functionality" argument is pretty much a moot point. I have to assume the only benefit in installing these recent upgrades was to plug security holes. It would seem that institutions, corporations, and universities would (or should) be more concerned about security than anything else.

When I worked in the corporate world, our IT staff would do security updates every single day. It was a nuisance (you couldn't start your work for 15 minutes until the updates were completed), but it was a necessary nuisance.
MX-14; 3.12-0.bpo.1-686-pae kernel using 4GB RAM
2.4GHz AMD Athlon 4600+
NVidia GeForce 6150 LE; 304.121 Display Driver
You didn't slow down because you're old; you're old because you slowed down.

User avatar
GoManutd
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:06 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#16 Postby GoManutd » Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:41 pm

but it's not the same as not upgrading.

the demands on current IT departments go well beyond security patches. there are plenty of compliance issues that need to be incorporated into everyday configuration management, and many corporations can't simply upgrade software without jumping through a bunch of hoops to ensure proper compliance is maintained. yes, it is a daily, ongoing process, but IT can't keep up with a rapid release cycle of a browser. some large organizations, like universities, simply do not have the staff.

this extended support agreement gives organizations that added time to ensure compatibility is maintained and compliance issues are addressed, while providing them some assurance that major security patches are being backported.

User avatar
Zevon
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 549
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:23 am

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#17 Postby Zevon » Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:45 pm

GoManutd wrote:but it's not the same as not upgrading.

the demands on current IT departments go well beyond security patches. there are plenty of compliance issues that need to be incorporated into everyday configuration management, and many corporations can't simply upgrade software without jumping through a bunch of hoops to ensure proper compliance is maintained. yes, it is a daily, ongoing process, but IT can't keep up with a rapid release cycle of a browser. some large organizations, like universities, simply do not have the staff.

this extended support agreement gives organizations that added time to ensure compatibility is maintained and compliance issues are addressed, while providing them some assurance that major security patches are being backported.


Amen to that!

Also the days of "security through obscurity" are long past and it's vital to patch and stay patched in addition to all other methods. There's an intelligentsia at work on the dark side lest anyone be unsure... ;)

The appearance of an LTS type Firefox suits me fine as a desktop user too especially as I'm echoing joany's opinion that FF is no 'faster/better' in the last few iterations.

I hope that we'll get a similar edition for Mepis, with the TB http links working of course. LOL

User avatar
richb
Administrator
Posts: 12962
Age: 71
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#18 Postby richb » Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:46 pm

Agree with the security issues that have been stated but with each iteration of FF I do find them substantially faster and better.
Forum Rules
Guide - How to Ask for Help

Rich

Laptop: Acer V5-572G: Intel i5, 12 GIG mem, Intel graphics, SanDisk SSD, 256GB
Virtualbox: Win 7
Desktop: MX-15- 64, AMD A8 7600 FM2+ CPU R7 Graphics, fglrx driver, 16 GIG Mem. Samsung EVO SSD 250 GB

User avatar
DBeckett
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 3064
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#19 Postby DBeckett » Wed Jan 11, 2012 3:54 pm

richb wrote:Agree with the security issues that have been stated but with each iteration of FF I do find them substantially faster and better.

That has been my experience too.
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3, AMD FX-6100 hex-core, 3.3GHz, 8G, Radeon HD6570

User avatar
Zevon
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 549
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:23 am

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#20 Postby Zevon » Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:09 am

DBeckett wrote:
richb wrote:Agree with the security issues that have been stated but with each iteration of FF I do find them substantially faster and better.

That has been my experience too.


I'd settle for, I haven't found them to be any slower/worse.

More seriously though, FF-9.0.1 mepiscr-1 does respond how I like, but I wish that it would load as quickly as Konqueror does, which seems almost instant. That speed is not achieved by using a preloaded copy, I'd better add. ;)


Return to “Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest