On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 10:16 -0700, Thomas Daede wrote: > On 10/12/2017 02:54 AM, Till Hofmann wrote: > > Yes, but that wasn't branded as all-new, better-than-ever Firefox (which > > it is), that intentionally breaks stuff which is directly visible by the > > end-user. An update that breaks the majority of extensions is very hard > > to sell for a stable release, as much as I love the new Firefox. > > Special-casing a normal Firefox release would be a bad idea as they > don't receive security backports. Switching Fedora to ESR-only would be > the only safe way to accomplish this. I think that may not realistically be possible, though, as 56 is not being made an ESR, AFAICT, and it sounds like downgrading from 56 to 52 (the most recent ESR), aside from the epoch bump it'd require on our side, is not straightforward (it seems there were profile changes between 56 and 52). However, I don't think this means we MUST ship 57. Talking about 'security backports' in the abstract is all well and good, but no-one even seems to have stated yet that there *are* any important security fixes in 57. Even if there are, we *can* look at the feasibility of backporting them ourselves (or in co-ordination with other distributors, who may well be in the same position as us). It's something we do for many other packages, after all; it's not impossible. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
