Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org a écrit: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 12:58 +0200 schrieb drago01: How else would you install an extension globally for all users? Or automate the installation of the addon ( like cobbler/pxe installation ) I think for that, we need upstream to provide a way to script what extensions can be installed the next time the user runs the application -- if that feature is not already available. -- Dodji -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 11:14:45AM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: How many multi-user systems run firefox from them? At the university We sure do. where I used to work we had this and it was awful because the tool itself isn't written for this use case. This was a problem in 2008.. it hasn't gotten any better since then. Very few applications are written with the old world view of centralizing usage. It doesn't Everything old is new again. fit either the largest use case (one user-one device) or the newer centralized usage where items are in a cloud and gotten through a portal system. I think our old way of doing things is becoming a corner case to be routed around. Yes, it certainly is as developers come increasingly from the small world view, and have no concern or thought for what their changes do on a larger scale. To me, that seems to be squandering an inherent advantage of our platform in a dubious race to compete on the desktop -- but that's tilting at windmills. Our approach going forward is going to be personal remote virtual machines -- the resources are still centralized, but the applications can't tell. -- Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org Senior Systems Architect -- Instructional Research Computing Services Harvard School of Engineering Applied Sciences -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
tis 2011-10-11 klockan 10:49 -0700 skrev Adam Williamson: There obviously is a _legitimate_ question as to whether you ought to be able to add your package into anyone else's update if you aren't a provenpackager; it's not necessarily something we'd want to do. But I think provenpackagers probably should be allowed to edit any update. I agree that it's probably not desireable to be able to randomly add packages to others updates, but it would be quite nice to link updates so that when the Firefox update is pushed the update for FF-Extension-X is also pushed. It does seem to be the case that negative karma is easier to come by than positive, yeah. I'm not sure there's much we can do about this besides 'game' the rules to account for it, as we're doing already to some extent. It needs to be a lot easier for people to get notified when there us updates-testing packages for packages they care about and can help testing. Much can be done there. Currently the threshold between using and testing is very very high when in reality it only needs to be one click away. Regards Henrik -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 20:38 +0200, Henrik Nordström wrote: tis 2011-10-11 klockan 10:49 -0700 skrev Adam Williamson: There obviously is a _legitimate_ question as to whether you ought to be able to add your package into anyone else's update if you aren't a provenpackager; it's not necessarily something we'd want to do. But I think provenpackagers probably should be allowed to edit any update. I agree that it's probably not desireable to be able to randomly add packages to others updates, but it would be quite nice to link updates so that when the Firefox update is pushed the update for FF-Extension-X is also pushed. It does seem to be the case that negative karma is easier to come by than positive, yeah. I'm not sure there's much we can do about this besides 'game' the rules to account for it, as we're doing already to some extent. It needs to be a lot easier for people to get notified when there us updates-testing packages for packages they care about and can help testing. Much can be done there. Currently the threshold between using and testing is very very high when in reality it only needs to be one click away. It's already been pointed out on test list that Bodhi provides RSS feeds you can use for this. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
mån 2011-10-10 klockan 20:44 +0200 skrev Thomas Spura: Forcing only critpath packages being in updates-testing and the rest being allowed to push to stable directly would help to fix issues much faster. You could set stable karma threshold to 1. It's then sufficient one tester gives positive karma (including yourself). But this does not solve the sycronisation between dependent updates. Regards Henrik -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:58:15 +0200 Henrik Nordström wrote: mån 2011-10-10 klockan 20:44 +0200 skrev Thomas Spura: Forcing only critpath packages being in updates-testing and the rest being allowed to push to stable directly would help to fix issues much faster. You could set stable karma threshold to 1. It's then sufficient one tester gives positive karma (including yourself). But this does not solve the sycronisation between dependent updates. I set them often to 1, but don't want to upkarma my own update because it feels like cheating... Especially updates, that fix a broken package, are an examples, that the current path (with forcing updates in updates-testing) taken is wrong and needs adjustment or more willing testers. -Tom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
ons 2011-10-12 klockan 21:41 +0200 skrev Thomas Spura: I set them often to 1, but don't want to upkarma my own update because it feels like cheating... Especially updates, that fix a broken package, are an examples, that the current path (with forcing updates in updates-testing) taken is wrong and needs adjustment or more willing testers. If you know the current package is broken then direct pushing by using your own testing karma is no chating. Adding karma without testing is cheating, but if you already know that the current package is seriously broken and that the same update in other Fedora versions works fine then cheating is better than nothing. Regards Henrik -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 00:04 +0200, Henrik Nordström wrote: ons 2011-10-12 klockan 21:41 +0200 skrev Thomas Spura: I set them often to 1, but don't want to upkarma my own update because it feels like cheating... Especially updates, that fix a broken package, are an examples, that the current path (with forcing updates in updates-testing) taken is wrong and needs adjustment or more willing testers. If you know the current package is broken then direct pushing by using your own testing karma is no chating. Adding karma without testing is cheating, but if you already know that the current package is seriously broken and that the same update in other Fedora versions works fine then cheating is better than nothing. Unfortunately it is disallowed (not technically blocked though) under the current update rules to give your own update a +1 karma. I at least partially tried to change this rule but I did not get enough votes from other FESCo members for this change. -- Tomas Mraz No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back. Turkish proverb -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:18:10 -0400 Bill Nottingham wrote: Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) said: On 10/10/2011 08:52 PM, Thomas Spura wrote: So there doesn't need to be more co-maintainers (which is welcomed anyway), but it would help to get such updates pushed to stable directly like it was without the forced period in updates-testing or a heads up before doing such an update. I think the heads up should be automated via the build system. If the required updates are due to version checks in the extensions, it might be possible to have RPM have a dependency generator that checks these and outputs the appropriate Requires/Conflicts lines, such that this could be easily caught by AutoQA. Implemented and proposed as a subpackage to mozilla-filesystem at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745038 Any extension, which BR: mozilla-build then has the correct requires, if it's installed correctly. Correctly means here, without symlinks, like I currently do in noscript and other extensions are doing it too right now. I'd propose to finally have mozilla-noscript, which pulls all subpackages, e.g. firefox-noscript and seahorse-noscript etc, and only those subpackages require firefox OR seahorse. Comments? -Tom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Thomas Spura (toms...@fedoraproject.org) said:
If the required updates are due to version checks in the extensions,
it might be possible to have RPM have a dependency generator that
checks these and outputs the appropriate Requires/Conflicts lines,
such that this could be easily caught by AutoQA.
Generally speaking, could be possible (didn't look at other extensions).
I'll try to script somthing for the requires generation
like /usr/lib/rpm/pythondeps.sh. But it won't be possible to easily
generalize requires, it would be better to have Conflicts:
!-- Firefox --
em:targetApplication
Description
em:id{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}/em:id
em:minVersion3.0/em:minVersion
em:maxVersion10.0a1/em:maxVersion
/Description
/em:targetApplication
There isn't only firefox in that file, there are many browsers that
aren't available in fedora, so R: Flock = 0.4 and R: Flock = 2.0.*
would be never fulfilled -- Choosing to conflict with all other
versions.
Would that be ok/sane?
You'd want:
Requires: firefox = 3.0
Conflicts: firefox 10.0a1
(You could do the first one as a conflicts, too, but since the package
is already going to have a Requires: on firefox, might as well just version
it.)
Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:36:01 -0400
Bill Nottingham wrote:
Thomas Spura (toms...@fedoraproject.org) said:
If the required updates are due to version checks in the
extensions, it might be possible to have RPM have a dependency
generator that checks these and outputs the appropriate
Requires/Conflicts lines, such that this could be easily caught
by AutoQA.
Generally speaking, could be possible (didn't look at other
extensions). I'll try to script somthing for the requires generation
like /usr/lib/rpm/pythondeps.sh. But it won't be possible to easily
generalize requires, it would be better to have Conflicts:
!-- Firefox --
em:targetApplication
Description
em:id{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}/em:id
em:minVersion3.0/em:minVersion
em:maxVersion10.0a1/em:maxVersion
/Description
/em:targetApplication
There isn't only firefox in that file, there are many browsers that
aren't available in fedora, so R: Flock = 0.4 and R: Flock = 2.0.*
would be never fulfilled -- Choosing to conflict with all other
versions.
Would that be ok/sane?
You'd want:
Requires: firefox = 3.0
Conflicts: firefox 10.0a1
(You could do the first one as a conflicts, too, but since the package
is already going to have a Requires: on firefox, might as well just
version it.)
The automatic requires proposed in bug #745038, does this:
Requires: firefox = 3.0
Requires: firefox = 10.0a1
and seems to work fine here so far. When a newer firefox-11.0 is
installed, yum should complain about it, I guess.
-Tom
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On 10/11/2011 10:36 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Thomas Spura (toms...@fedoraproject.org) said:
If the required updates are due to version checks in the extensions,
it might be possible to have RPM have a dependency generator that
checks these and outputs the appropriate Requires/Conflicts lines,
such that this could be easily caught by AutoQA.
Generally speaking, could be possible (didn't look at other extensions).
I'll try to script somthing for the requires generation
like /usr/lib/rpm/pythondeps.sh. But it won't be possible to easily
generalize requires, it would be better to have Conflicts:
!-- Firefox --
em:targetApplication
Description
em:id{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}/em:id
em:minVersion3.0/em:minVersion
em:maxVersion10.0a1/em:maxVersion
/Description
/em:targetApplication
There isn't only firefox in that file, there are many browsers that
aren't available in fedora, so R: Flock= 0.4 and R: Flock= 2.0.*
would be never fulfilled -- Choosing to conflict with all other
versions.
Would that be ok/sane?
You'd want:
Requires: firefox= 3.0
Conflicts: firefox 10.0a1
(You could do the first one as a conflicts, too, but since the package
is already going to have a Requires: on firefox, might as well just version
it.)
What you should use is:
Add-on Compatibility Reporter 0.9.2
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/add-on-compatibility-reporter/?src=api
--
David
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 13:16 +0200, Thomas Spura wrote: On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 11:05:28 +0200 Till Maas wrote: On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 11:43:58PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? The problem is that testers seem to ignore test cases provided for updates, because there is an test case to check for extension compatibility. That doesn't help much. It would be great, when bodhi would allow me to add an updated mozilla-noscript to the firefox update, when I notice, that the new firefox upadate in testing breaks it. Otherwise, firefox is pushed to stable more faster, than mozilla-noscript and it's broken for some time, till it was long enought in updates-testing. It is possible to add packages to updates; the issue is permissions. I'm not entirely sure how it works at present, but it's _something_ like 'only people who are explicitly maintainers of one of the packages in the initial update set can edit the update'. Notably, there is no provenpackager exemption for editing updates: provenpackagers can't edit any update as you might expect. There obviously is a _legitimate_ question as to whether you ought to be able to add your package into anyone else's update if you aren't a provenpackager; it's not necessarily something we'd want to do. But I think provenpackagers probably should be allowed to edit any update. It's NOT possible to push it faster out there, because I usually don't get much karma. For the last update, I got 2 new bug reports, that noscript is broken, but not a single +1 karma for the same issue, although linking in both bug reports and being in updates-testing anyways... It does seem to be the case that negative karma is easier to come by than positive, yeah. I'm not sure there's much we can do about this besides 'game' the rules to account for it, as we're doing already to some extent. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 11:14 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 05:28, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 12:58 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 11:34 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: That just reminds me while packing firefox extensions is not a good idea. How else would you install an extension globally for all users? How many multi-user systems run firefox from them? At the university where I used to work we had this and it was awful because the tool itself isn't written for this use case. This was a problem in 2008.. it hasn't gotten any better since then. Very few applications are written with the old world view of centralizing usage. It doesn't fit either the largest use case (one user-one device) or the newer centralized usage where items are in a cloud and gotten through a portal system. I think our old way of doing things is becoming a corner case to be routed around. Yeah. FWIW I just don't use the Fedora packaged extensions; I use adblock plus, but I install it via Firefox's add-on system, not from the package. I'm pretty sympathetic to Smooge's view here, Firefox just isn't really designed for add-ons to be installed via distro packages, it seems. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 11:40 -0600, Tim Flink wrote: On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 13:16:52 +0200 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org wrote: It would be great, when bodhi would allow me to add an updated mozilla-noscript to the firefox update, when I notice, that the new firefox upadate in testing breaks it. Otherwise, firefox is pushed to stable more faster, than mozilla-noscript and it's broken for some time, till it was long enought in updates-testing. It's NOT possible to push it faster out there, because I usually don't get much karma. For the last update, I got 2 new bug reports, that noscript is broken, but not a single +1 karma for the same issue, although linking in both bug reports and being in updates-testing anyways... (Hope to not get the usual That's the job of AutoQA answer...) On the bright side, I don't see how AutoQA could help in this situation so my answer isn't that's the job of AutoQA. On the down side, I don't really have any good answers on how to improve the situation. Well, I do. It seems pretty simple: we only have a few extensions packaged. We should consider extensions to be effectively API dependencies of Firefox, which means any Firefox update must also include updates for the dependencies - extensions. We should ask the Firefox maintainers and extension maintainers to co-ordinate so that each Firefox update which changes the extension API number (or whatever it is that causes extensions to be marked 'incompatible') includes rebuilds of each extension. That way Firefox can't be pushed without the extensions. Nothing in the above paragraph looks particularly onerous or difficult to organize, to me. We're only talking about a few packages and packagers. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:01:00 -0400 David Michael wrote: Hi, On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org wrote: The automatic requires proposed in bug #745038, does this: Requires: firefox = 3.0 Requires: firefox = 10.0a1 and seems to work fine here so far. When a newer firefox-11.0 is installed, yum should complain about it, I guess. About two months ago I started looking into Mozilla extension packaging guidelines. The draft I found as a base[1] suggests not using dependencies on applications, and I agree with the idea among, among others listed. (I.e. if a user wants HTTPS-Everywhere for Seamonkey, they should not be forced to install Firefox.) +1 Would you mind reading over the draft and considering the points where it conflicts with your script? If you think there is value in pursuing similar Mozilla extension guidelines, I can also try to get my additions uploaded to the wiki. If not, perhaps some of the files I have been using locally (such as a spec template or a script to create directories for all supported applications in the install.rdf) could still be of use in the mozilla-build package. I'm using it partly. The draft suggests to install anything into /usr/share/mozilla/extensions/common and then symlink to all browsers supported in Fedora, e.g. into /usr/share/mozilla/extensions/$browser_id/$extension_id (But I do it manually, this seems to be a new draft, but I like the xpi_unpack cmds etc, that could be easy integrated into the mozilla-build package.) The main *BIG* difference is, that draft symlinks the extension *directory* and the script expects a install.rdf file below that. This means, the symlinking needs to happen one step below that, so that all files inside of the extension_id folder are symlinked, but the install.rdf still needs to be a real copy, so it can be opened at build time. Rationale: A directory symlink can't be resolved at build time, so we cannot follow that symlink on build time. When that's changed, the scripts are working fine along each other. About no dependency using from above: The dependencies will be added automatic with the scripts, so to avoid pulling in e.g. seamonkey, when you only want to have the firefox extension, there need to be one package for each extension, which owns /usr/share/mozilla/extensions/$browser_id/$extension_id. This way e.g. firefox-$extension would automaticalls require the correct firefox versions but no seahorse, because that has to be owned by seahorse-$extension - just as an example, but it would make sense. Kalev, does this make sense? Can this be integrated into the drafts? I'll try to add those macros proposed there into /usr/lib/rpm/macros.mozilla and see if they really work out. -Tom P.S. A working example is uploaded to fedorapeople at [1], which has this outputs in the end with rpmbuild: :) Processing files: firefox-noscript-2.1.4-1.fc15.noarch Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 Requires: firefox = 10.0a1 firefox = 3.0 Processing files: seamonkey-noscript-2.1.4-1.fc15.noarch Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 Requires: seamonkey = 2.0 seamonkey = 2.7a1 [1] http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/moz_draft/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:49:54AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: There obviously is a _legitimate_ question as to whether you ought to be able to add your package into anyone else's update if you aren't a provenpackager; it's not necessarily something we'd want to do. But I think provenpackagers probably should be allowed to edit any update. There is an easy to answer question whether package maintainers should be able to specify that a certain build needs to be pushed to stable when some other build is pushed to stable. It is a different question whether the current model of grouping builds together as an update is a good idea. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:57:35 -0700 Adam Williamson wrote: On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 11:40 -0600, Tim Flink wrote: On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 13:16:52 +0200 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org wrote: It would be great, when bodhi would allow me to add an updated mozilla-noscript to the firefox update, when I notice, that the new firefox upadate in testing breaks it. Otherwise, firefox is pushed to stable more faster, than mozilla-noscript and it's broken for some time, till it was long enought in updates-testing. It's NOT possible to push it faster out there, because I usually don't get much karma. For the last update, I got 2 new bug reports, that noscript is broken, but not a single +1 karma for the same issue, although linking in both bug reports and being in updates-testing anyways... (Hope to not get the usual That's the job of AutoQA answer...) On the bright side, I don't see how AutoQA could help in this situation so my answer isn't that's the job of AutoQA. On the down side, I don't really have any good answers on how to improve the situation. Well, I do. It seems pretty simple: we only have a few extensions packaged. We should consider extensions to be effectively API dependencies of Firefox, which means any Firefox update must also include updates for the dependencies - extensions. We should ask the Firefox maintainers and extension maintainers to co-ordinate so that each Firefox update which changes the extension API number (or whatever it is that causes extensions to be marked 'incompatible') includes rebuilds of each extension. That way Firefox can't be pushed without the extensions. Nothing in the above paragraph looks particularly onerous or difficult to organize, to me. We're only talking about a few packages and packagers. Firefox can be pushed without the extensions, because the broken deps mail can be ignored. This won't be the case, once AutoQA is able to stop updates, which is not a solution to the current problem, so I didn't want to talk about that much. Nevertheless, it could be a good first step to get notified of problems, when firefox maintainer delay the updates and only build rawhide, so that broken deps have a chance to notify people. That's why I'm working towards this direction. -Tom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 20:46 +0200, Thomas Spura wrote: Well, I do. It seems pretty simple: we only have a few extensions packaged. We should consider extensions to be effectively API dependencies of Firefox, which means any Firefox update must also include updates for the dependencies - extensions. We should ask the Firefox maintainers and extension maintainers to co-ordinate so that each Firefox update which changes the extension API number (or whatever it is that causes extensions to be marked 'incompatible') includes rebuilds of each extension. That way Firefox can't be pushed without the extensions. Nothing in the above paragraph looks particularly onerous or difficult to organize, to me. We're only talking about a few packages and packagers. Firefox can be pushed without the extensions, because the broken deps mail can be ignored. This won't be the case, once AutoQA is able to stop updates, which is not a solution to the current problem, so I didn't want to talk about that much. I'm not talking about _technical_ enforcement here but policy enforcement: yes, it would still be technically possible for the Firefox maintainer to push an update, there would be no code safeguards in place to prevent it happening. I'm simply saying that if you all get together and ensure that you agree it should happen and work out some procedures to make sure it doesn't, then the problem would still be solved. We don't need technological enforcement for everything, sometimes just getting people to sit down with each other and work out a process that solves the problem can work just fine. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Le dimanche 09 octobre 2011 à 13:28 +0200, Christoph Wickert a écrit : Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 12:58 +0200 schrieb drago01: That just reminds me while packing firefox extensions is not a good idea. How else would you install an extension globally for all users? Or automate the installation of the addon ( like cobbler/pxe installation ) -- Michael Scherer -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On 10/11/2011 09:32 PM, Thomas Spura wrote: The main *BIG* difference is, that draft symlinks the extension *directory* and the script expects a install.rdf file below that. This means, the symlinking needs to happen one step below that, so that all files inside of the extension_id folder are symlinked, but the install.rdf still needs to be a real copy, so it can be opened at build time. Rationale: A directory symlink can't be resolved at build time, so we cannot follow that symlink on build time. When that's changed, the scripts are working fine along each other. Could just use relative symlinks for the directories, so that they can be resolved at build time. About no dependency using from above: The dependencies will be added automatic with the scripts, so to avoid pulling in e.g. seamonkey, when you only want to have the firefox extension, there need to be one package for each extension, which owns /usr/share/mozilla/extensions/$browser_id/$extension_id. This way e.g. firefox-$extension would automaticalls require the correct firefox versions but no seahorse, because that has to be owned by seahorse-$extension - just as an example, but it would make sense. Yeah, I think there are two alternatives: a) one big package and no requires on specific browsers, b) split packages and each package requires a specific browser My draft used (a), but either way would work. Kalev, does this make sense? Can this be integrated into the drafts? I'll try to add those macros proposed there into /usr/lib/rpm/macros.mozilla and see if they really work out. Could you just fork my draft and amend it? I am not sure I am sufficiently interested in properly finishing it up. -- Kalev -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 14:07:17 -0600 Peter Gueckel wrote: Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: Yeah sometimes is okay of course. Happening every two or three weeks it isn't. So, why are you using devel? This happened on F-15. -Tom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 03:41:43 +0530 Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 10/10/2011 03:33 AM, Till Maas wrote: On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 11:10:12PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 10/09/2011 10:59 PM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: I'd prefer a bit less bleeding edge over breaking crucial packages. Sometimes unavoidable due to security issues Why was it unavoidable with Firefox? I didn't say it was. Just pointing out that there are such circumstances. Firefox extension maintainers need to be aware of the accelerated release schedule of Firefox and get help by asking for co-maintainers if necessary. Firefox 7.0 was pushed to stable with getting karma in 1 day: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-13465 I wasn't aware of the broken mozilla-noscript until I got the stable update of firefox, so I had no chance of pushing an update fast enough. I did immediately an update, which took 9 days to hit stable: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-13563 Instead of getting one +1 karma, there have been two bug reports, that noscript needs an update, but without karma, that didn't help to resolve this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742847 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743308 So there doesn't need to be more co-maintainers (which is welcomed anyway), but it would help to get such updates pushed to stable directly like it was without the forced period in updates-testing or a heads up before doing such an update. -Tom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Thomas Spura wrote: So, why are you using devel? This happened on F-15. This is the devel list, not the general list. Sorry. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:03:34AM -0600, Peter Gueckel wrote: Thomas Spura wrote: So, why are you using devel? This happened on F-15. This is the devel list, not the general list. Sorry. Although the branch for rawhide was once named devel, the naming of this as devel does not limit its topic to people running rawhide or the software versions and packages in the rawhide branch. This list is about development of Fedora. If Thomas were asking for enduser support it would be inappropriate for this list. If he's pointing out how our methods of developing Fedora can be improved then it is on-topic. -Toshio pgpFdOBefjtwi.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 11:05:28 +0200 Till Maas opensou...@till.name wrote: On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 11:43:58PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? The problem is that testers seem to ignore test cases provided for updates, because there is an test case to check for extension compatibility. Or the testers providing karma don't have the extensions in question installed. Personally, I do use noscript but I grabbed it from addons.mozilla.org and not as a Fedora package. To be honest, I didn't even know that it was packaged. The idea behind karma is to be more sure that an update doesn't horribly break systems with a common configuration. Unfortunately, that also tends to mean that every update isn't tested in every possible configuration. There are only so many people pulling from updates-testing that are willing to provide karma. One (potentially unpopular) option would be to ask the FF maintainers to increase the minimum positive karma for pushing to stable. Since FF is a rather popular package, that is not likely to delay it's updates much but would provide more time for different configurations to be tested before a push to stable. Tim signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 23:43:58 +0200 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? Anyone with a FAS account can pull updates from updates-testing and provide karma to those updates. Karma giving isn't limited to those who brand themselves as QA People. We'd love to have more proventesters [1] to help test these things if anyone is interested, though. Tim [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 13:16:52 +0200 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org wrote: It would be great, when bodhi would allow me to add an updated mozilla-noscript to the firefox update, when I notice, that the new firefox upadate in testing breaks it. Otherwise, firefox is pushed to stable more faster, than mozilla-noscript and it's broken for some time, till it was long enought in updates-testing. It's NOT possible to push it faster out there, because I usually don't get much karma. For the last update, I got 2 new bug reports, that noscript is broken, but not a single +1 karma for the same issue, although linking in both bug reports and being in updates-testing anyways... (Hope to not get the usual That's the job of AutoQA answer...) On the bright side, I don't see how AutoQA could help in this situation so my answer isn't that's the job of AutoQA. On the down side, I don't really have any good answers on how to improve the situation. How do we encourage people to use updates-testing? Once people are using updates-testing, how do we encourage them to provide needed karma? We're trying to figure out answers to those questions but at the moment, nobody's come up with any easy answers. If you have suggestions on either one of those, we'd love to hear them either on test@ or at the proventester meetings (Wednesday @ 18:00 UTC - #fedora-meeting). Tim signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On 10/10/2011 08:52 PM, Thomas Spura wrote: So there doesn't need to be more co-maintainers (which is welcomed anyway), but it would help to get such updates pushed to stable directly like it was without the forced period in updates-testing or a heads up before doing such an update. I think the heads up should be automated via the build system. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am 10.10.2011 18:03, schrieb Peter Gueckel: This is the devel list, not the general list. Sorry. ...which doesn't solve the problem either. Sorry. Regards, -- Vinzenz Vietzke Fedora Events Ninja / Coordination German L10N Team Mail: viet...@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On 10/10/2011 11:40 AM, Tim Flink wrote: On the bright side, I don't see how AutoQA could help in this situation so my answer isn't that's the job of AutoQA. On the down side, I don't really have any good answers on how to improve the situation. How do we encourage people to use updates-testing? Once people are using updates-testing, how do we encourage them to provide needed karma? http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel Since I wrote that I have acquired some of the skills necessary to build the tool I'm describing, but not the time. I do think that some of the info in that thread was informative on this problem. -- Nathanael d. Noblet t 403.875.4613 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:30:19 -0600 Tim Flink wrote: On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 23:43:58 +0200 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? Anyone with a FAS account can pull updates from updates-testing and provide karma to those updates. Karma giving isn't limited to those who brand themselves as QA People. There is too much can in it. We could get karma, but actually we only get for main/big/popular packages. The less used ones are hiding in updates-testing for a defined time, without karma. (I hope the stats for karma in bodhi will show that.) Forcing only critpath packages being in updates-testing and the rest being allowed to push to stable directly would help to fix issues much faster. -Tom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) said: On 10/10/2011 08:52 PM, Thomas Spura wrote: So there doesn't need to be more co-maintainers (which is welcomed anyway), but it would help to get such updates pushed to stable directly like it was without the forced period in updates-testing or a heads up before doing such an update. I think the heads up should be automated via the build system. If the required updates are due to version checks in the extensions, it might be possible to have RPM have a dependency generator that checks these and outputs the appropriate Requires/Conflicts lines, such that this could be easily caught by AutoQA. Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:18:10 -0400
Bill Nottingham wrote:
Rahul Sundaram (methe...@gmail.com) said:
On 10/10/2011 08:52 PM, Thomas Spura wrote:
So there doesn't need to be more co-maintainers (which is welcomed
anyway), but it would help to get such updates pushed to stable
directly like it was without the forced period in updates-testing
or a heads up before doing such an update.
I think the heads up should be automated via the build system.
If the required updates are due to version checks in the extensions,
it might be possible to have RPM have a dependency generator that
checks these and outputs the appropriate Requires/Conflicts lines,
such that this could be easily caught by AutoQA.
Generally speaking, could be possible (didn't look at other extensions).
I'll try to script somthing for the requires generation
like /usr/lib/rpm/pythondeps.sh. But it won't be possible to easily
generalize requires, it would be better to have Conflicts:
!-- Firefox --
em:targetApplication
Description
em:id{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}/em:id
em:minVersion3.0/em:minVersion
em:maxVersion10.0a1/em:maxVersion
/Description
/em:targetApplication
There isn't only firefox in that file, there are many browsers that
aren't available in fedora, so R: Flock = 0.4 and R: Flock = 2.0.*
would be never fulfilled -- Choosing to conflict with all other
versions.
Would that be ok/sane?
-Tom
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
W dniu 08.10.2011 23:43, Christoph Wickert pisze: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually. We have ratified very strict guidelines for updates in the stable releases and we allow one of the critical path applications to break this hard? So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? More ideas or suggestions? Regards, Christoph I never had any langpack problems - my firefox runs nicely in Polish. When it comes to extensions, I don't see a point of packaging them anymore. IIRC in the past x86_64 builds were an issue, but this seems no longer to be the case. As such, I am using TB/FF extension management system. Julian -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 11:43:58PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? The problem is that testers seem to ignore test cases provided for updates, because there is an test case to check for extension compatibility. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. Which extensions are you talking about? The ones I use never caused an such issues. * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually. Something is broken on your system. rpm -qV firefox should tell you that. So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? They are already there. 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? Which maintainers are you talking about? Packaged extensions or upstream extension maintainers? 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? That's already one of the test cases but you can't expect people to test every extension in the world. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 11:34 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. Which extensions are you talking about? The ones I use never caused an such issues. For example mozilla-adblockplus or chatzilla, also German language packs or dictionaries. * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually. Something is broken on your system. rpm -qV firefox should tell you that. rpm's verify gives no output, so everything is ok. Even if I create a new firefox profile I have the same problem. So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? They are already there. Indeed, they are there, but stopped working at some point. At least for me. 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? Which maintainers are you talking about? Packaged extensions or upstream extension maintainers? Packaged extensions of course, notifying upstream doesn't make much sense. 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? That's already one of the test cases but you can't expect people to test every extension in the world. No, but the packaged ones. It is the FF maintainers duty to notify extension maintainers in advance [1]. If they are proven packagers they could also fix the extensions themselves. If not they should apply for co-maintainership. Regards, Christoph [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintainer_responsibilities#Notify_others_of_changes_that_may_affect_their_packages -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 11:34 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. Which extensions are you talking about? The ones I use never caused an such issues. For example mozilla-adblockplus or chatzilla, also German language packs or dictionaries. The later works for me No idea about chatzilla. Adblock plus (the upstream version) works for me. * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually. Something is broken on your system. rpm -qV firefox should tell you that. rpm's verify gives no output, so everything is ok. Even if I create a new firefox profile I have the same problem. Odd. So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? They are already there. Indeed, they are there, but stopped working at some point. At least for me. Sounds like some kind of bug you implied that they where removed no language pack provided and bring them back which isn't the case. So file a bug please. 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? Which maintainers are you talking about? Packaged extensions or upstream extension maintainers? Packaged extensions of course, notifying upstream doesn't make much sense. 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? That's already one of the test cases but you can't expect people to test every extension in the world. No, but the packaged ones. It is the FF maintainers duty to notify extension maintainers in advance [1]. If they are proven packagers they could also fix the extensions themselves. If not they should apply for co-maintainership. That just reminds me while packing firefox extensions is not a good idea. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am Samstag, den 08.10.2011, 23:51 +0200 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 08.10.2011 23:43, schrieb Christoph Wickert: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again this makes me crazy too but as long as upstream is braindead and packing security-fixes only in major-version upgrades not solveable I agree that upstream is ... erm, difficult these days, but whether or not we allow the breakage downstream is our decision. We could at least take care of the packaged extensions. * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually there must be something terrible worong on your system i never got any firefox in the past 6 years with was not in german language - independent of version / fedora-package, upstream package I agree there is something wrong on my system because the langiage pack is actually included in the rpm package. However the fact that it's not picked up makes me think that I've hit a bug in FF. Regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 11:05:28 +0200 Till Maas wrote: On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 11:43:58PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? The problem is that testers seem to ignore test cases provided for updates, because there is an test case to check for extension compatibility. That doesn't help much. It would be great, when bodhi would allow me to add an updated mozilla-noscript to the firefox update, when I notice, that the new firefox upadate in testing breaks it. Otherwise, firefox is pushed to stable more faster, than mozilla-noscript and it's broken for some time, till it was long enought in updates-testing. It's NOT possible to push it faster out there, because I usually don't get much karma. For the last update, I got 2 new bug reports, that noscript is broken, but not a single +1 karma for the same issue, although linking in both bug reports and being in updates-testing anyways... (Hope to not get the usual That's the job of AutoQA answer...) Tom -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 12:58 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 11:34 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. Which extensions are you talking about? The ones I use never caused an such issues. For example mozilla-adblockplus or chatzilla, also German language packs or dictionaries. The later works for me No idea about chatzilla. Adblock plus (the upstream version) works for me. I am talking of our packages, except for the dictionary. It's not packaged and required a manual update for FF 5. Chatzilla standalone was broken (at least) by FF 6 and 7. Our mozilla-adblockplus package was broken twice and I updated it. So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? They are already there. Indeed, they are there, but stopped working at some point. At least for me. Sounds like some kind of bug you implied that they where removed no language pack provided and bring them back which isn't the case. So file a bug please. Indeed, because it stopped working with FF4 without me having changed anything, I incorrectly assumed they were removed. I just looked at the package contents after somebody replied that the language packs still work fine for him. But where should I file a bug? I doubt that Mozilla upstream feels responsible for problems with our packages and I don't think that our FF maintainers will troubleshoot a problem that started with Firefox 4 either. That just reminds me while packing firefox extensions is not a good idea. How else would you install an extension globally for all users? Regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Dne 8.10.2011 23:43, Christoph Wickert napsal(a): * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. Well the question is how should we care for the Fedora-packaged Firefox/Thunderbird extensions? Is there any particular reason why we should have them otherwise that every bit of the information has to have blue icon on it? Matěj -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 17:56 +0200 schrieb Matej Cepl: Dne 8.10.2011 23:43, Christoph Wickert napsal(a): * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. Well the question is how should we care for the Fedora-packaged Firefox/Thunderbird extensions? Is there any particular reason why we should have them otherwise that every bit of the information has to have blue icon on it? I'm afraid I don't understand your question. What blue icon? I already gave a reason why we should maintain these packages as RPM, but unfortunately you have trimmed that part of my mail: There is no way to install and manage extensions globally for all users on a computer. Regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 05:28, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 12:58 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 11:34 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: That just reminds me while packing firefox extensions is not a good idea. How else would you install an extension globally for all users? How many multi-user systems run firefox from them? At the university where I used to work we had this and it was awful because the tool itself isn't written for this use case. This was a problem in 2008.. it hasn't gotten any better since then. Very few applications are written with the old world view of centralizing usage. It doesn't fit either the largest use case (one user-one device) or the newer centralized usage where items are in a cloud and gotten through a portal system. I think our old way of doing things is becoming a corner case to be routed around. -- Stephen J Smoogen. The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance. Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University. Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacLaren -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Dne 9.10.2011 18:20, Christoph Wickert napsal(a): I'm afraid I don't understand your question. What blue icon? I thought there is some kind of Fedora fascism in play (Unless it is packaged by Fedora community, it is no good.). I was apparently wrong. I already gave a reason why we should maintain these packages as RPM, but unfortunately you have trimmed that part of my mail: There is no way to install and manage extensions globally for all users on a computer. http://kb.mozillazine.org/Installing_extensions https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Installing_extensions Matěj -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am 09.10.2011 12:50, schrieb Christoph Wickert: Which extensions are you talking about? The ones I use never caused an such issues. For example mozilla-adblockplus or chatzilla, also German language packs or dictionaries. use adblockplus from the mozilla-extensions page works fine with FF4,5,6,7 problem is that the packaged extensions for FF/TB are NOT updated as rapidly they should, but this is not a problem of firefox itself So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? They are already there. Indeed, they are there, but stopped working at some point. At least for me. seems only affect you because i would cry loud if my FF is no longer in german and i am using the 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? Which maintainers are you talking about? Packaged extensions or upstream extension maintainers? Packaged extensions of course, notifying upstream doesn't make much sense. the question is why are the extension-maintainers are not using updates-testing - i see a new ff-build as user at the same time it is built and extensions-maintainers do not look what happening? No, but the packaged ones. It is the FF maintainers duty to notify extension maintainers in advance [1]. If they are proven packagers they could also fix the extensions themselves. If not they should apply for co-maintainership in my opinion the maintainers of firefox should also maintain the packed extensions and update/rebuild them at the same time as FF/TB signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am 08.10.2011 23:43, schrieb Christoph Wickert: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. Not wanting to hijack this thread but Thunderbird has these problems, too. Having to writing Emails without GPG encryption due to failing Enigmail is a real pain. To break it down to the simple: As there are only a few extensions packaged and they are mostly very important ones, what keeps us from blocking Firefox/Thunderbird updates until extension rpms are up to date, too? I'd prefer a bit less bleeding edge over breaking crucial packages. Regards, vinz. -- Vinzenz Vietzke Fedora Events Ninja / Coordination German L10N Team Mail: viet...@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/09/2011 10:59 PM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: I'd prefer a bit less bleeding edge over breaking crucial packages. Sometimes unavoidable due to security issues Rahul -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOkdx8AAoJELauRe7G9dGMZT8H/2CmoTzA66xdzBjwsdMFx4Xv IfG3Ln39GGaf24QZ5HwzTCPGFJzI+VaRWXN/abIc1SU2DUsY7oFW7AjpWTEGdKIO RNaZj7uvxsAem6LCmmIeLjhvcehwe/RQ4McN6CA0Apm2xogRpAvGn1OYL3q4GOjd MgtkfB3vqUTYl0D7vOVPfiJQoi2hTTWrWeqEgmXu8ckqafgx+rngSSs8b6eu2F/F l9n4pxlB+yuhvApgZXnc2M8zkjCq/k+mQ/BfHkdg3hM8llcQSP7V1iJB8wmthwp0 8Q8xA+nxW6PoeKcF/vPy+7ZzaULJW2AtWDN1dAj3dNnj1s8QK27ZIPqy9xVpwZs= =eqdg -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 19:15 +0200 schrieb Matej Cepl: Dne 9.10.2011 18:20, Christoph Wickert napsal(a): I already gave a reason why we should maintain these packages as RPM, but unfortunately you have trimmed that part of my mail: There is no way to install and manage extensions globally for all users on a computer. http://kb.mozillazine.org/Installing_extensions https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Installing_extensions This is about installing extensions, not about actually *managing* them. There are several manual steps involved here (download, extract, look up app-id, create folder, copy to folder, register) and by *managing* something efficiently I mean to not have to perform these steps steps again and again and again. Regards, Chrtistoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 11:14 -0600 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 05:28, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 12:58 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 11:34 +0200 schrieb drago01: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: That just reminds me while packing firefox extensions is not a good idea. How else would you install an extension globally for all users? How many multi-user systems run firefox from them? Actually I maintain some computers with multi-user FF installs and I'd like to be able to install important extensions like adblockplus and noscript automatically and I need to be sure that all users of the computer will continue to use these extensions without having to update them. Even though the update is simple many people don't do it and as a result the extensions get disabled. I am not sure if packaging FF extensions is wise, but I know there are valid use cases and I am convinced that we as the Fedora project can handle the updates better then we currently do. I am not demanding something unreasonable, all I want is that we apply our update guidelines to one of the key applications we ship. Regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am Sonntag, den 09.10.2011, 12:59 +0200 schrieb Reindl Harald: problem is that the packaged extensions for FF/TB are NOT updated as rapidly they should, but this is not a problem of firefox itself No, but it's a problem of Fedora and we should address it instead of just throwing it over the fence. the question is why are the extension-maintainers are not using updates-testing - i see a new ff-build as user at the same time it is built and extensions-maintainers do not look what happening? Please keep in mind that most extension maintainers are volunteers while gecko-maint are AFAIK RH employees. They spend more time on Fedora. And there is the problem of karma: Firefox has more users, thus more testers and gets pushed quicker than the extensions. No, but the packaged ones. It is the FF maintainers duty to notify extension maintainers in advance [1]. If they are proven packagers they could also fix the extensions themselves. If not they should apply for co-maintainership in my opinion the maintainers of firefox should also maintain the packed extensions and update/rebuild them at the same time as FF/TB +1, but we should give the FF maintainers a helping hand here. Extension maintainers should look for updates themselves, but once they are built, they should be included in the same update as FF to make sure all packages hit the repos at the same time. Regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am 09.10.2011 19:40, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: I'd prefer a bit less bleeding edge over breaking crucial packages. Sometimes unavoidable due to security issues Yeah *sometimes* is okay of course. Happening every two or three weeks it isn't. Regards, -- Vinzenz Vietzke Fedora Events Ninja / Coordination German L10N Team Mail: viet...@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Am 09.10.2011 21:09, schrieb Vinzenz Vietzke: Am 09.10.2011 19:40, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: I'd prefer a bit less bleeding edge over breaking crucial packages. Sometimes unavoidable due to security issues Yeah *sometimes* is okay of course. Happening every two or three weeks it isn't. Why don't you blame *mozilla* to make it possible to easily install and manage extensions centralized? This would IMHO be the best way for all because it makes packaging extensions allmost unnecessary. Regards, Heiko Adams -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iF4EAREIAAYFAk6R9eoACgkQ/zGbOvPHkcK1wgD+L5RF5MWqXTxLzmvVYuMA2phD 0giLgAsQWJmQfbCTHHgA/jz5pIW5SATKl4D4ZFXXmQWxYxELJ82cavO29oYw9lt4 =xmgo -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: Yeah sometimes is okay of course. Happening every two or three weeks it isn't. So, why are you using devel? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Dne 9.10.2011 20:31, Christoph Wickert napsal(a): This is about installing extensions, not about actually *managing* them. There are several manual steps involved here (download, extract, look up app-id, create folder, copy to folder, register) and by *managing* something efficiently I mean to not have to perform these steps steps again and again and again. Did you try https://wiki.mozilla.org/Enterprise ? I think issue (which is very real relevant one, I don't want to downplay it) could be much better resolved upstream. Matěj -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 18:20:56 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: I already gave a reason why we should maintain these packages as RPM, but unfortunately you have trimmed that part of my mail: There is no way to install and manage extensions globally for all users on a computer. There is also no trust in security of a 3rd party blob. The Fedora packager should verify some way and normally takes some (law non-binding) responsibility the Fedora package is not a trojan. Regards, Jan -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 09:28:45PM +0200, Heiko Adams wrote: Why don't you blame *mozilla* to make it possible to easily install and manage extensions centralized? This would IMHO be the best way for all because it makes packaging extensions allmost unnecessary. Using the same logic you should install Firefox directly from Mozilla instead of using the Firefox RPM from Fedora. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 11:10:12PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 10/09/2011 10:59 PM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: I'd prefer a bit less bleeding edge over breaking crucial packages. Sometimes unavoidable due to security issues Why was it unavoidable with Firefox? Afaik updated Firefox extensions were available upstream but where not pushed to Fedora along the Firefox updates. And for Thunderbird it is even documented in Bodhi that a build of an extension was available for an update of Thunderbird but not pushed together with the Thunderbird update. There do not seem to be strong arguments except that the current update software or procedures are broken and package maintainers lack the power to fix identified problems shortly. Regards Till -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On 10/10/2011 03:33 AM, Till Maas wrote: On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 11:10:12PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 10/09/2011 10:59 PM, Vinzenz Vietzke wrote: I'd prefer a bit less bleeding edge over breaking crucial packages. Sometimes unavoidable due to security issues Why was it unavoidable with Firefox? I didn't say it was. Just pointing out that there are such circumstances. Firefox extension maintainers need to be aware of the accelerated release schedule of Firefox and get help by asking for co-maintainers if necessary. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am 09.10.2011 21:28, schrieb Heiko Adams: Why don't you blame *mozilla* to make it possible to easily install and manage extensions centralized? I do, but doing so doesn't get package maintainers out of duty. We (Fedora) are responsible for working packages and if upstream is messing up, we have to contact them AND get our packages working - even if it's just blocking updates or another workaround. Regards, -- Vinzenz Vietzke Fedora Events Ninja / Coordination German L10N Team Mail: viet...@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually. We have ratified very strict guidelines for updates in the stable releases and we allow one of the critical path applications to break this hard? So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? More ideas or suggestions? Regards, Christoph -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On 10/08/2011 05:43 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again. Sometimes there is not even an update available upstream. * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually. We have ratified very strict guidelines for updates in the stable releases and we allow one of the critical path applications to break this hard? So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? More ideas or suggestions? Regards, Christoph This is why I now use only google-chrome. -- Regards, OldFart -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 23:43:58 +0200 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: ...snip... So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? More ideas or suggestions? Sadly, upstream is being pretty distro hostile these days I fear. We can try and put our efforts behind https://wiki.mozilla.org/Enterprise/Firefox/ExtendedSupport:Proposal and hope there's a extended support version? Possibly we could ship both that and the latest Firefox-999 version. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
Am 08.10.2011 23:43, schrieb Christoph Wickert: Since Mozilla switched to the new rapid release model, Firefox in Fedora is no longer fun: Every 6 weeks a new major version hits our stable release and breaks Firefox horribly: * My favorite extensions (and actually the only thing that keeps me using FF) stop working. In the last 7 weeks I had to pitch in three times and update packages to get things working again this makes me crazy too but as long as upstream is braindead and packing security-fixes only in major-version upgrades not solveable * Firefox falls back to English as there is no language pack provided. I have to go go the FTP server and download and install the XPI file manually there must be something terrible worong on your system i never got any firefox in the past 6 years with was not in german language - independent of version / fedora-package, upstream package signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Firefox on Fedora: No longer funny
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote: On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 23:43:58 +0200 Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote: ...snip... So what can we do to improve the situation? 1. Can we bring back the language packs as part of the packages? 2. Can the FF maintainers make sure that all maintainers of extensions get notified of changes *before* release of a new package? 3. Can someone (I'm looking at you, QA) make sure all extensions are still compatible? More ideas or suggestions? Sadly, upstream is being pretty distro hostile these days I fear. We can try and put our efforts behind https://wiki.mozilla.org/Enterprise/Firefox/ExtendedSupport:Proposal and hope there's a extended support version? Possibly we could ship both that and the latest Firefox-999 version. kevin -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel I've heard that Mozilla will be making some massive changes to their handling of Extensions for Firefox 8 to fix a lot of these issues. Since Firefox 4, there actually have not been a lot of changes to the Extensions API, but because Fedora doesn't have the rebuilding mechanism that Mozilla Addons has, the extensions have not been automatically updated with new compatibility information. One major change I know of is that Extensions will be assumed compatible by default instead of incompatible. That means that while Firefox will warn users about extensions that say they only support older versions, they will not be disabled. Not all the blame lies on Mozilla though. Fedora could do better on handling Firefox updates too. Unlike the upgrade from Firefox 3.6 to Firefox 4, Firefoxes 5, 6, and 7 are not actually really that major. Firefox 8 will make some radical changes, but functionally it isn't a major upgrade. We need to start treating Firefox releases as safe, minor upgrades beginning with Firefox 8. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
