MEPIS Community Forum

A Linux operating system based on Debian Stable
View unanswered posts | View unsolved topics | View active topics |



Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox 
Author Message
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 2900
Has thanked: 415 times
Have thanks: 446 times
Post # 292590
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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, Radeon HD6570
Gigabyte A55M-DS2, AMD A4-3400 dual-core APU (llano), 2.7 GHz, Radeon HD graphics
IBM ThinkPad T43, Intel Pentium M, 1.73GHz, Intel chipset


Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:16 pm
Profile
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:45 pm
Posts: 5672
Location: Penn's Woods
Has thanked: 804 times
Have thanks: 662 times
Post # 292591
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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


Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:25 pm

joany thanked by: Zevon
Profile
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 2900
Has thanked: 415 times
Have thanks: 446 times
Post # 292595
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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, Radeon HD6570
Gigabyte A55M-DS2, AMD A4-3400 dual-core APU (llano), 2.7 GHz, Radeon HD graphics
IBM ThinkPad T43, Intel Pentium M, 1.73GHz, Intel chipset


Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:50 pm
Profile
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:06 pm
Posts: 2952
Has thanked: 52 times
Have thanks: 376 times
Post # 293286
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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


Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:34 am
Profile
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:45 pm
Posts: 5672
Location: Penn's Woods
Has thanked: 804 times
Have thanks: 662 times
Post # 293292
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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.

Quote:
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


Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:15 pm
Profile
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:06 pm
Posts: 2952
Has thanked: 52 times
Have thanks: 376 times
Post # 293293
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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.


Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:41 pm
Profile
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 549
Has thanked: 80 times
Have thanks: 43 times
Post # 293305
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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


Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:45 pm
Profile
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm
Posts: 10629
Location: Rochester NY
Has thanked: 820 times
Have thanks: 1414 times
Post # 293307
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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
Link to Wiki
Rich

Acer Laptop V5-572G: Intel i5, 12 GIG mem, nVidia GT720M/Intel integrated graphics
Mx-14 Symbiosis
Kubuntu 13.10, KDE 4.11.2


Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:46 pm
Profile
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 2900
Has thanked: 415 times
Have thanks: 446 times
Post # 293325
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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, Radeon HD6570
Gigabyte A55M-DS2, AMD A4-3400 dual-core APU (llano), 2.7 GHz, Radeon HD graphics
IBM ThinkPad T43, Intel Pentium M, 1.73GHz, Intel chipset


Wed Jan 11, 2012 3:54 pm
Profile
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 549
Has thanked: 80 times
Have thanks: 43 times
Post # 293391
Post Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox
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. ;)


Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:09 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Protected by Anti-Spam ACP Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.