Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

In Precise we've upgraded to version 11 of both Firefox and Thunderbird.
But the reason for starting to upgrade frequently was said to be that
Mozillas support periods were limited for newer versions after 3.6. But
now we have the 10ESR versions of both. Why are they not used instead of
the short-term 11?


Thanks

Jo-Erlend Schinstad

--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

On 02/04/2012 02:51 PM, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:
In
Precise we've upgraded to version 11 of both Firefox and
Thunderbird. But the reason for starting to upgrade frequently was
said to be that Mozillas support periods were limited for newer
versions after 3.6. But now we have the 10ESR versions of both.
Why are they not used instead of the short-term 11?




Thanks




Jo-Erlend Schinstad





I agree, Firefox 10 is the initial Enterprise Support Release and
will be maintained for 9 release cycles with a 2 cycle overlap for
the next version.

That means the next ESR is not due until Firefox 17.



It is illogical to run non-ESR on LTS, unless you are Captain Kirk.



Double Thanks,



Viktor Basso

"Tea Earl Grey Hot"








--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

On Sunday 05 February 2012 11:56 AM, Viktor Basso wrote:

On 02/04/2012 02:51 PM, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:

In Precise we've upgraded to version 11 of both Firefox and
Thunderbird. But the reason for starting to upgrade frequently was
said to be that Mozillas support periods were limited for newer
versions after 3.6. But now we have the 10ESR versions of both. Why
are they not used instead of the short-term 11?

Thanks

Jo-Erlend Schinstad


I agree, Firefox 10 is the initial Enterprise Support Release and will
be maintained for 9 release cycles with a 2 cycle overlap for the next
version.
That means the next ESR is not due until Firefox 17.

It is illogical to run non-ESR on LTS, unless you are Captain Kirk.


And please rebuild and upload xul-ext-lightning and enigmail with
support for TB 11. Even alpha/beta users need calendar and gpg support.


I didn't pay attention to the upgrade. Next time I'll make sure I upload
only when the necessary dependencies are also met.


Ritesh

--
Given the large number of mailing lists I follow, I request you to CC me
in replies for quicker response


--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

On 04.02.2012 15:51, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:

In Precise we've upgraded to version 11 of both Firefox and Thunderbird.
But the reason for starting to upgrade frequently was said to be that
Mozillas support periods were limited for newer versions after 3.6. But
now we have the 10ESR versions of both. Why are they not used instead of
the short-term 11?


Agreed, my ex-colleagues hate it when the version changes every few
weeks on their environment. I'd think it's the same for every
entreprise-y user out there..


Guess it's not possible to provide the ESR release as an option, so that
the upgrade needs to be tested at such sites only once a year instead of
nine times?



--
t

--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

Hi All -
Firefox ESR is indeed interesting, and it would seem to answer some of the question corporations might have about Firefox, but I think it is less interesting for Ubuntu.*


Firefox*adopted*a rapid release model for various reasons, but among them was that they needed the browser to keep up with the pace of innovation on the internet. Ubuntu needs to be out in front of these things and be pushing the very edge of what is possible,*particularly*in*the*browser. I do not think we can ship a browser that will lag by 12 months in any sense; the risks too far outweigh the rewards.*


I'm afraid that even a year lag (ESR update period) would put Ubuntu at severe disadvantage to other platforms. Imagine a world where G+ or Facebook or some new whizbang product didn't work on Ubuntu because the browser shipped didn't support some new technology/_javascript_ engine/platform component. That is neither something we want nor can afford. We have to be better, we have to be faster and we have to be braver.*


The browser is among the chief components of the desktop that needs to keep pace (or better) and I feel adopting Firefox ESR would be the wrong choice for Ubuntu desktop.*
Thanks,

Jason

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Jo-Erlend Schinstad <joerlend.schinstad@gmail.com> wrote:



In Precise we've upgraded to version 11 of both Firefox and Thunderbird. But the reason for starting to upgrade frequently was said to be that Mozillas support periods were limited for newer versions after 3.6. But now we have the 10ESR versions of both. Why are they not used instead of the short-term 11?






Thanks



Jo-Erlend Schinstad



--

ubuntu-desktop mailing list

ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop



--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

On 06/02/12 09:22, Jason Warner wrote:

Hi All -

Firefox ESR is indeed interesting, and it would seem to answer some of
the question corporations might have about Firefox, but I think it is
less interesting for Ubuntu.

Firefox adopted a rapid release model for various reasons, but among
them was that they needed the browser to keep up with the pace of
innovation on the internet. Ubuntu needs to be out in front of these
things and be pushing the very edge of what is
possible, particularly in the browser. I do not think we can ship a
browser that will lag by 12 months in any sense; the risks too far
outweigh the rewards.

I'm afraid that even a year lag (ESR update period) would put Ubuntu at
severe disadvantage to other platforms. Imagine a world where G+ or
Facebook or some new whizbang product didn't work on Ubuntu because the
browser shipped didn't support some new technology/javascript
engine/platform component. That is neither something we want nor can
afford. We have to be better, we have to be faster and we have to be
braver.

The browser is among the chief components of the desktop that needs to
keep pace (or better) and I feel adopting Firefox ESR would be the wrong
choice for Ubuntu desktop.


Hi,

Does anything stop us from shipping it in universe?

I agree that Ubuntu needs to have a browser that supports the very
latest in web technologies, however providing a choice over the default
would be a very good thing for our enterprise users.


Regards,

Tom



--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

On 02/06/2012 10:22 AM, Jason Warner wrote:


Hi All -



Firefox ESR is indeed interesting, and it would seem to
answer some of the question corporations might have about
Firefox, but I think it is less interesting for Ubuntu.*




Firefox*adopted*a rapid release model for various reasons,
but among them was that they needed the browser to keep up
with the pace of innovation on the internet. Ubuntu needs to
be out in front of these things and be pushing the very edge
of what is possible,*particularly*in*the*browser. I do not
think we can ship a browser that will lag by 12 months in any
sense; the risks too far outweigh the rewards.*



I'm afraid that even a year lag (ESR update period) would
put Ubuntu at severe disadvantage to other platforms. Imagine
a world where G+ or Facebook or some new whizbang product
didn't work on Ubuntu because the browser shipped didn't
support some new technology/_javascript_ engine/platform
component. That is neither something we want nor can afford.
We have to be better, we have to be faster and we have to be
braver.*



The browser is among the chief components of the desktop
that needs to keep pace (or better) and I feel adopting
Firefox ESR would be the wrong choice for Ubuntu desktop.*



Thanks,
Jason






On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 12:21 AM,
Jo-Erlend Schinstad <joerlend.schinstad@gmail.com>
wrote:

In Precise
we've upgraded to version 11 of both Firefox and
Thunderbird. But the reason for starting to upgrade
frequently was said to be that Mozillas support periods were
limited for newer versions after 3.6. But now we have the
10ESR versions of both. Why are they not used instead of the
short-term 11?



Thanks



Jo-Erlend Schinstad



--

ubuntu-desktop mailing list

ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop












I can agree that Ubuntu "needs to be out in front of these things".

But I do not believe that the Long Term Support releases should.








--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?
 

On 02/06/2012 12:14 PM, Viktor Basso wrote:


On 02/06/2012 10:22 AM, Jason Warner wrote:


Hi All -



Firefox ESR is indeed interesting, and it would seem to
answer some of the question corporations might have about
Firefox, but I think it is less interesting for Ubuntu.*



Firefox*adopted*a rapid release model for various
reasons, but among them was that they needed the browser to
keep up with the pace of innovation on the internet. Ubuntu
needs to be out in front of these things and be pushing the
very edge of what is possible,*particularly*in*the*browser.
I do not think we can ship a browser that will lag by 12
months in any sense; the risks too far outweigh the
rewards.*



I'm afraid that even a year lag (ESR update period) would
put Ubuntu at severe disadvantage to other platforms.
Imagine a world where G+ or Facebook or some new whizbang
product didn't work on Ubuntu because the browser shipped
didn't support some new technology/_javascript_
engine/platform component. That is neither something we want
nor can afford. We have to be better, we have to be faster
and we have to be braver.*



The browser is among the chief components of the desktop
that needs to keep pace (or better) and I feel adopting
Firefox ESR would be the wrong choice for Ubuntu desktop.*



Thanks,
Jason






On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 12:21 AM,
Jo-Erlend Schinstad <joerlend.schinstad@gmail.com>
wrote:

In
Precise we've upgraded to version 11 of both Firefox and
Thunderbird. But the reason for starting to upgrade
frequently was said to be that Mozillas support periods
were limited for newer versions after 3.6. But now we have
the 10ESR versions of both. Why are they not used instead
of the short-term 11?



Thanks







I can agree that Ubuntu "needs to be out in front of these
things".

But I do not believe that the Long Term Support releases should.






+1 on that . That's the actual difference between LTS and regular
releases - that LTS provides a stable environment (which always
costs being aback on the latest technologies ) . So there's the
choice - stable&a bit otdated or changing&latest . LTS
should provide the first (say with the option to upgrade to the
latest version from the repositories) .



--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop