Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #166665

Re: Iceweasel security updates?

Show all headers | View raw

On 04/12/2016 12:08 PM, The Wanderer wrote
> The Firefox development process follows a type of cascading release:
> http://www.askvg.com/mozilla-updates-firefox-update-channels-nightly-aurora-beta-and-release/
>
> There are nightly builds, which are compiled every night from the public
> source tree (assuming it actually builds at the moment), and made
> available for developer use. These are bleeding-edge, potentially
> unstable and buggy code.
>
> There's the 'Aurora' release channel, which is the next stage of
> stability after nightly builds. It's more or less the "experimental
> release" niche, the first step towards designating something as a
> release; think of it as comparable to an alpha release. After the old
> 'Aurora' becomes the new 'Beta', a version of the latest nightly code
> becomes the new Aurora. Not every new patch gets into Aurora - only
> patches which the developers agree are important for the coming release.
>
> There's the 'Beta' release channel, which is the next stage of stability
> after Aurora. After the old 'Beta' becomes the new 'Release' version,
> the old Aurora becomes the new Beta. As with Aurora, not every new patch
> gets into Beta - and the standards for what qualifies to get in are
> tighter than with Aurora.
>
> There's the 'Release' release channel, which is what gets published as a
> new official Firefox version. Once every six weeks (or thereabouts), the
> old Beta becomes the new Release. No patches at all are accepted into
> Release, unless a critically urgent oh-shit-that's-bad issue is
> discovered and the developers decide to make a "chemspill" point release
> (e.g., the difference between 45.0 and 45.0.1).
>
> There's the 'ESR' release channel, which is maintained over roughly a
> year-long period. Once every seven Firefox major versions (which come
> once every six weeks), a copy of the new Release version becomes the new
> ESR. In theory, only security and stability patches make it into the
> ESR; new features, and anything which might introduce a regression, are
> verboten. (In practice, the developers sometimes don't live up to that
> ideal.)
>
>
> The more you need stability, the lower down this list you should go
> with. The newer and faster you need new features and potential bug fixes
> (at the risk of new bugs being _added_), the higher up the list you
> should go with.
>
> For myself, I always recommend that anyone not actively developing
> Firefox should run the ESR.
>


Thanks for all the details, W!  This should definitely come in handy.

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Iceweasel security updates? Harris Paltrowitz <harris1nyc@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 15:10 +0200
  Re: Iceweasel security updates? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 15:50 +0200
    Re: Iceweasel security updates? Harris Paltrowitz <harris1nyc@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 16:20 +0200
      Re: Iceweasel security updates? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 17:10 +0200
        Re: Iceweasel security updates? Harris Paltrowitz <harris1nyc@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 17:50 +0200
          Re: Iceweasel security updates? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2016-04-12 18:10 +0200
            Re: Iceweasel security updates? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 18:20 +0200
            Re: Iceweasel security updates? Harris Paltrowitz <harris1nyc@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 21:10 +0200
          Re: Iceweasel security updates? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 18:20 +0200
            Re: Iceweasel security updates? Harris Paltrowitz <harris1nyc@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 18:30 +0200
  Re: Iceweasel security updates? Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-04-12 16:30 +0200
  Re: Iceweasel security updates? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2016-04-12 17:20 +0200

csiph-web