Am Sonntag, den 26.06.2011, 13:25 -0300 schrieb Evandro Giovanini: > On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Christoph Wickert > <christoph.wickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 26.06.2011, 17:08 +0200 schrieb Kevin Kofler: > >> Felix Miata wrote: > >> > FF5 is the security update to FF4.0.1, which incorporates an upstream > >> > versioning policy change. > >> > >> The funny thing is that Firefox is going exactly the opposite way of us with > >> their update policies, > > > > They didn't change their update policy but their release/development > > model. FF 5 is an update to FF 4, but 3.6 got an update to 3.6.18, too. > > This means that Mozilla's update policy hasn't changed. > > > >> and that as a result, that Firefox security update is > >> not compliant with our update policies > > > > At what point exactly? Basically all that has changed is the version, > > IHMO FF 5 can better be described as FF 4.1. The user experience hasn't > > changed and the update meets all requirements of the update policy, so I > > really don't see a problem here. > > > > Firefox 5 is not stable because it introduces new features. New features don't have anything to do with stability. It's the AI/ABI and AFAIK nothing has changed in xulrunnner. All dependent packages required a simple rebuild. We had these rebuilds with every single FF update. > The most > visible example of this is users who had extensions stop working with > Firefox 5. This is most likely because the extensions expect a certain version string but not because of API/ABI changes. > Firefox's policy has changed. In the past they supported a stable > version for more than one day after the new release was out. What policy? The security policy? Firefox 3.6 is considered the previous stable version and it is still supported. > They're > not doing that anymore with Firefox 4, so users are forced to use the > new features (and bugs) of a new release. It's a great policy if > you're in a race to not lose mindshare from Chrome, it's not so great > for the people who have Firefox deployed in stable environments. Look, I never said I like the new version scheme. In fact I said that I dislike it. The major version shouldn't have been bumped because is a stable update, this means there are no API/ABI changes and no change in configuration formats either. There are merely no changes and there is a clean upgrade path, so I have no idea what problems in a stable environment you are expecting. And I have no idea what part of our update policy should be violated by this update. Please somebody enlighten me. Regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
