long lived esr-like branch that we
only ship to XP users.
I suspect that backporting to this would get very difficult very
quickly. We'd be better off moving XP to ESR IMO.
I think you're right about that.
What we should keep in mind, though, is that if we decide to move XP
users to ESR now, we
On 4/20/16 11:53 AM, Armen Zambrano G. wrote:
> Would it make more sense to have a relbranch instead of using ESR?
Oh lordy, no! It's hard enough diverting engineering work to supporting
a single ESR 9 months after the fork. Why would we do two of them? How
would a relbranch differ from ESR?
>
er, because we'd need CI for
> it. You're basically proposing a long lived esr-like branch that we only
> ship to XP users.
>
> I suspect that backporting to this would get very difficult very quickly.
> We'd be better off moving XP to ESR IMO.
>
> On 2016-04-20 02:53 PM, Ar
nly ship to XP users.
I suspect that backporting to this would get very difficult very
quickly. We'd be better off moving XP to ESR IMO.
On 2016-04-20 02:53 PM, Armen Zambrano G. wrote:
Would it make more sense to have a relbranch instead of using ESR?
IIRC ESRs are stable for a period but when
oduct better on current systems. Moving XP to ESR would liberate us
from thinking of some of them, but, granted, we might feel compelled
to figure out stuff like the AVX thing even on ESR. Also, some of the
above are sunk cost now, but my point is that as long as XP is treated
as supported, it can
lone, but
they add up and take our collective attention away from making our
product better on current systems. Moving XP to ESR would liberate us
from thinking of some of them, but, granted, we might feel compelled
to figure out stuff like the AVX thing even on ESR. Also, some of the
above are
> I wonder how much of the marketshare is likely XP SP2.
According to the longitudinal dataset, SP2 is roughly 16% of the Windows XP
population, with the rest SP3. So, still some millions of users.
:chutten
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Mike Conley wrote:
> The people
The people on this thread might find chutten's recent blog post interesting:
https://chuttenblog.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/firefoxs-windows-xp-users-upgrade-path/
Juicy chunk: "Between 40% and 53% of Firefox users running Windows XP
are Stuck"
-Mike
On 18/04/2016 9:04 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>
On 2016/04/20 5:14, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
On Apr 18, 2016, at 09:56, Milan Sreckovic wrote:
What’s the “XP tax”? Graphics usually tries to simplify the playing field as
much as possible, but I can’t say that XP has been causing any trouble, or that
we have been
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 1:20:56 PM UTC-7, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016, at 04:14 PM, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
> > The good news is that dxr does not find anything using IsXPSP3OrLater().
> > But this looks like we have a bit of version specific code in our tree:
> >
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016, at 04:14 PM, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
> > The good news is that dxr does not find anything using IsXPSP3OrLater().
> > But this looks like we have a bit of version specific code in our tree:
> >
>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016, at 04:14 PM, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
> The good news is that dxr does not find anything using IsXPSP3OrLater().
> But this looks like we have a bit of version specific code in our tree:
> https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?q=XP_WIN=false=true
FYI, the "XP" here
> On Apr 18, 2016, at 09:56, Milan Sreckovic wrote:
>
> What’s the “XP tax”? Graphics usually tries to simplify the playing field as
> much as possible, but I can’t say that XP has been causing any trouble, or
> that we have been getting too many XP specific problems
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Chris Peterson wrote:
> OTOH, if an XP users doesn't mind running an unpatched OS, then they
> probably won't care/know about running an unpatched Chrome browser.
Gmail nags you if you use an outdated Chrome version. I know someone
who
Hi
Am 18.04.2016 um 20:02 schrieb Chris Peterson:
> On 4/18/16 6:46 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> Am 18.04.2016 um 15:18 schrieb Kyle Huey:
>>> > 12% of our users are on Windows XP.
>> And XP still runs on ~10% of all desktops. That's an opportunity to
>> convert some of the users to Firefox.
>
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Chris Peterson wrote:
>
> OTOH, if an XP users doesn't mind running an unpatched OS, then they
> probably won't care/know about running an unpatched Chrome browser.
>
>From data that Chris H-C posted in some previous thread, we know that
On 4/18/16 6:46 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
Am 18.04.2016 um 15:18 schrieb Kyle Huey:
> 12% of our users are on Windows XP.
And XP still runs on ~10% of all desktops. That's an opportunity to
convert some of the users to Firefox.
If we want to convert some Chrome XP users, we could run a
What’s the “XP tax”? Graphics usually tries to simplify the playing field as
much as possible, but I can’t say that XP has been causing any trouble, or that
we have been getting too many XP specific problems (certainly fewer than
Windows 10 :)
I don’t see XP going away soon, and as
On 04/18/2016 07:20 AM, Lawrence Mandel wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
XP has now gone for two years without security patches from Microsoft.
Additionally, as of its latest release, Chrome no longer supports XP.
When 46 ships, it would be a
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Kyle Huey wrote:
> 12% of our users are on Windows XP.
That's been getting lower all the time, right? With the current
trajectory, what's the expected percentage at the time when the 45 ESR
would go out of support (assuming normal ESR cycle
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> XP has now gone for two years without security patches from Microsoft.
> Additionally, as of its latest release, Chrome no longer supports XP.
>
> When 46 ships, it would be a great time to make AUS advertise 45 ESR
>
Am 18.04.2016 um 15:18 schrieb Kyle Huey:
> 12% of our users are on Windows XP.
And XP still runs on ~10% of all desktops. That's an opportunity to
convert some of the users to Firefox.
Best regards
Thomas
>
> - Kyle
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Henri Sivonen
12% of our users are on Windows XP.
- Kyle
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> XP has now gone for two years without security patches from Microsoft.
> Additionally, as of its latest release, Chrome no longer supports XP.
>
> When 46 ships, it would be
XP has now gone for two years without security patches from Microsoft.
Additionally, as of its latest release, Chrome no longer supports XP.
When 46 ships, it would be a great time to make AUS advertise 45 ESR
builds to XP (even on non-ESR) channel. This would keep XP supported
through the ESR
24 matches
Mail list logo