Hi
Recently I reviewed -current changelog and noticed such interesting think.
And now I want ask: any particular reason for this? I have reviewed changelogs of 12.x and 13.x and did not found any instances of 3.0.x-3.6.x betas(i.e there wasn't any 3.6.12b1). Any particular reason of having beta version of bugfix and very minor releases now?



regards, Yaroslav

My guess is that since they[mozilla] switched firefox to a rapid release cycle, -current is just trying to keep up.

I guess because:
- this way you can test the slackbuild for the next stable version;
- there are new features in betas in which people might be interested (at least I am);
- they usually work fine.

Jenni, in general I agreed -current keep up with latest firefox(regardless of disagreement of including firefox into Slackware at all(or ever its existing)), but I disagreed any reasons(if any?) to see any betas here. "Mozilla switched for rapid release cycle" is only means that instead of old style version 4.0.10 we have new 8.0, i.e. it is looks like to include firefox 3.6.15beta in older times. I trying to guess causes forced PV to do such irrational thing(IMHO).

ponce Introduce garbage into distribution in order to test SlackBuild? I don't think so.I don't think there are any world breaking feature in firefox so it cannot wait of its final release. Taking into account Slackware release period, there are will be a dozen of firefox releases. Users which can't wait so long probably can manually install beta and/or forge proper SlackBuild without PV help.Another reason to not to include betas into testing.

sorry, I can't see the point: they are in /testing, not in the main tree.

it's true that mozilla is developing new versions very fast: alphas/nightlies of 10 and 11 are already available.

1 members found this post helpful.

ponce, testing packages will be included when -current will be released(and that firefox version will outdated the new release will be installed by user), so it will be redundant; and they(testing packages) will eventually migrate into "main tree". But any way I don't care of all testing packages now, I care about firefox's alpha/beta redundant packages.

Which version are you running?

Unless you signed up as an official Mozilla beta-tester, you should not be receiving beta-version updates. CIP, I receive automatic updates, and I have v8.0 on Windows, and 3.6.24 on Ubuntu and Puppy, which are current release versions.

Official beta-testers will be running beta versions, which are also available for manual installation to the general public.

edit:

Ahh, I think I see what he's getting at now. Given that Firefox releases so frequently now, their usefulness is somewhat devalued. Nothing wrong with Pat providing them of course, but there really doesn't seem much point in providing the betas when what they contain will be in the main release within a week or two.

You are free to not use anything from the /testing branch.
Now stop whining.

Eric

4 members found this post helpful.

Obviously Pat can provide whatever he likes in testing/ however the point raised is interesting. Given the changes to the mozilla release mechanism are these beta packages going to be sufficiently long lived to warrant the effort Pat spends on building them? I can see the value when the next firefox was going to be months away, but now?

I don't care either way whether he does or doesn't, but it seems a little harsh to accuse FeyFe of whining just for raising the question (granted I misunderstood his point at first too so perhaps it could have been better expressed). Maybe there's a chance for Pat to reduce his workload here that hadn't occurred to him.

I was responding in part to his remark "Introduce garbage into distribution in order to test SlackBuild? I don't think so.".

Does it occur to you that some people in corporate environments need to test versions of Firefox before they are released to the masses? With the rapid versioning inflation of Firefox, extensions can unexpectedly stop working between releases. This needs verification before you get hit by it.

Eric

0 members found this post helpful.

Yes, I understand that very well, and mozilla's approach to releases certainly causes problems for corporates, but that is pretty niche:. how many corporates are running slackware dekstops with firefox and would make use of these beta packages? Even if there are a few, I don't necessarily agree that it's Pat's responsibility to provide them with the updated versions to test. Any good corporate IT dept that has a strong interest in firefox will most likely have more resource than the Slackware team has (which lets face it isn't much) and anyone with a significant interest would probably be keeping a much closer eye on upstream anyway.


All I'm suggesting is that in spite of how FeyFre presented it, the underlying question is worth considering.
But, like I said above: it doesn't matter to me either way.

1 members found this post helpful.

I trust the judgement of the Slackware Team.

0 members found this post helpful.

Hi,

I too feel that the beta software is placed in there for users benefit. Not just from a corporate sense but a world community test bed basis. You can try it and if you do not like it then rollback.

We are talking about '-current' not the final versions. Security updates are provided for other versions that need to be performed since most of the Mozilla minor releases are security related. I do appreciate having Major numbered 'beta' software made available via '/testing'.

It would be anyone's choice to ignore '/testing' or to use it. Personal choices.

1 members found this post helpful.