[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Richard J Goodhouse]

-- 
*Have a Happy and Prosperous Year.*
*Richard J Goodhouse*


*626-593-9114 - Skype Phone-*


*626-482-9752 - Smart Phone for texting - *

*You can also Get TeamViewer Here*
*https://www.dropbox.com/history/Team.Viewer.RJG.03.exe?_subject_uid=9946049
*



___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019, James Pearson wrote:
I notice Mozilla have announced that the Rapid Release schedule is moving to 
a 4 week release cycle from next year:


https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/09/moving-firefox-to-a-faster-4-week-release-cycle/

Does this mean we will get ESR point releases every 4 weeks as well?

Also, does this mean the ESR major release schedule will have a 3 (or 4?) 
point release overlap between major version releases?


That link says:
  Starting Q1 2020, we plan to ship a major Firefox release every 4 weeks.
  Firefox ESR release cadence (Extended Support Release for the enterprise)
  will remain the same. In the years to come, we anticipate a major ESR
  release every 12 months with 3 months support overlap between new ESR
  and end-of-life of previous ESR. The next two major ESR releases will
  be ~June 2020 and ~June 2021.

A 3 month support overlap suggests a 3 or 4 point-release overlap to me.

June-September is probably the best time for a 3 month overlap for the
many northern-hemisphere universities that work on a September-June
academic year, but I don't know how well it will work in the southern
hemisphere or anywhere else with a calendar-year academic year.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[James Pearson]

James Pearson wrote:


Mike Kaply wrote:


Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence

We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox
Extended Support releases.

Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would
like to understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each
year, would help meet the needs of you and your organization.

We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port
features and functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of
web app compatibility issues that arise due to the ESR being too
outdated. While the ESR helps lower QA overhead through less frequent
updates, would a biannual release bring more benefits to you? Please
chime in on this feedback form.

I think the current (approx) yearly major version release is about right
for us

I guess if you went to (say) a 6 monthly major version release, then you
would need to keep a 6 month overlap - with each major release supported
for a year - i.e. always have the latest and previous release supported


I notice Mozilla have announced that the Rapid Release schedule is 
moving to a 4 week release cycle from next year:



https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/09/moving-firefox-to-a-faster-4-week-release-cycle/

Does this mean we will get ESR point releases every 4 weeks as well?

Also, does this mean the ESR major release schedule will have a 3 (or 
4?) point release overlap between major version releases?


Thanks

James Pearson
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[James Pearson]

Mike Kaply wrote:
> 
> Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence
> 
> We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox
> Extended Support releases.
> 
> Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would
> like to understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each
> year, would help meet the needs of you and your organization.
> 
> We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port
> features and functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of
> web app compatibility issues that arise due to the ESR being too
> outdated. While the ESR helps lower QA overhead through less frequent
> updates, would a biannual release bring more benefits to you? Please
> chime in on this feedback form.
I think the current (approx) yearly major version release is about right 
for us

I guess if you went to (say) a 6 monthly major version release, then you 
would need to keep a 6 month overlap - with each major release supported 
for a year - i.e. always have the latest and previous release supported

James Pearson
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Robert Marcano]

On 8/20/19 1:31 PM, Mike Kaply wrote:
We have a new ExtensionSettings policy that will allow you to enable 
extensions by ID.


Thanks for this change, but I think this will allow someone to create an 
extension with using an internally developed id, ask Mozilla to sign it, 
and then use it on managed machines?


I still think whitelisting signer hashes is a good idea.

Note: Just as a reference of other tools that do this, the defunct Java 
Web Start technology has this to allow whitelisting applications 
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/deploy/deployment_rules.html#CIHEFCEC




this will be in the next ESR update and Firefox 69 (It was in 68 but had 
some bugs so I didn't release it)


Mike

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:24 PM Robert Marcano 
mailto:rob...@marcanoonline.com>> wrote:


On 8/19/19 12:31 PM, Mike Kaply wrote:
 > The Firefox ESR has always supported turning off extension
signing so
 > you can install local extensions.

I wish it wasn't an on or off switch, but more a list of allowed
certificates (hashes?), and be able to disable Mozilla's certificates
That way you can allow your users to use approved internal extensions
without giving them the privilege to usa any Mozilla approved ones or
install random XPIs without signatures

 >
 > Mike
 >
 > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:58 AM Paul Kosinski via Enterprise
 > mailto:enterprise@mozilla.org>
>> wrote:
 >
 >     As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer
stability to
 >     new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes
to the User
 >     Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google
started it
 >     so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their
computing
 >     environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic
Theme
 >     Restorer could fix that.
 >
 >     The move to Quantum killed much of the ability to make
Firefox look the
 >     way the user wanted and was used to. This has meant that
users had to
 >     learn the new interface rather than doing useful work (sort
of like
 >     The Microsoft Office "Ribbon" debacle). And the modern fad of
replacing
 >     text-labeled icons with pure icons means that no one can know
for sure
 >     what they mean, no matter what language they speak. (Plus,
"hovering"
 >     over the icon to get the tool-tip wastes more time.) Not all
users have
 >     to make do with tiny smartphone screens which don't have the
space for
 >     labeled icons.
 >
 >     The move to Quantum also required some really critical
add-ons, such as
 >     NoScript, to be totally reimplemented, and made many other
add-ons
 >     (such as Classic Theme Restore) apparently impossible. In the
case of
 >     NoScript, there may have been a period where the overall
security of
 >     using Firefox suffered in spite of the more secure internal
structure
 >     of Quantum.
 >
 >     And speaking of security, although the idea of requiring
add-ons to be
 >     signed by Mozilla (only!) may be good for the consumer
versions of
 >     Firefox, it is totally inappropriate for the *Enterprise* version
 >     (ESR). It means that any organization that wants add-ons that
*need* to
 >     be kept private can't use Firefox at all. The notion that
they could
 >     use a local build or an unofficial build (daily etc.) could
mean that
 >     they are violating some other corporate or government regulation
 >     concerning what software they are allowed to use. And how
would one
 >     even *find* the daily etc. build that is essentially
identical to the
 >     release build?
 >
 >     Since ESR is for enterprise use, surely it should be possible
to allow
 >     enterprise-private add-ons to be loaded in ESR if their
*hash* is signed
 >     by Mozilla. (Mozilla should not be in the business of trying
to protect
 >     enterprises from software they themselves write.) In other
words, an
 >     enterprise would just submit a hash of the add-on XPI to
Mozilla the
 >     way they now can submit the whole XPI. Then if so configured
(e.g., via
 >     about:config) the ESR version of Firefox would allow the
add-on to be
 >     loaded iff its hash passed the signature test. To add to "public
 >     safety", Firefox could display a caveat stating that the
add-on belongs
 >     to XYZ Corp. and is in no way certified by Mozilla. Plus, of
course,
 >     such hash-signed add-ons would never be hosted by Mozilla.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >     On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:54:28 +
 >     Ramkrishna Reddy D S mailto:ram

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Mike Kaply]

We have a new ExtensionSettings policy that will allow you to enable
extensions by ID.

this will be in the next ESR update and Firefox 69 (It was in 68 but had
some bugs so I didn't release it)

Mike

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:24 PM Robert Marcano 
wrote:

> On 8/19/19 12:31 PM, Mike Kaply wrote:
> > The Firefox ESR has always supported turning off extension signing so
> > you can install local extensions.
>
> I wish it wasn't an on or off switch, but more a list of allowed
> certificates (hashes?), and be able to disable Mozilla's certificates
> That way you can allow your users to use approved internal extensions
> without giving them the privilege to usa any Mozilla approved ones or
> install random XPIs without signatures
>
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:58 AM Paul Kosinski via Enterprise
> > mailto:enterprise@mozilla.org>> wrote:
> >
> > As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer
> stability to
> > new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes to the
> User
> > Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google started
> it
> > so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their
> computing
> > environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic Theme
> > Restorer could fix that.
> >
> > The move to Quantum killed much of the ability to make Firefox look
> the
> > way the user wanted and was used to. This has meant that users had to
> > learn the new interface rather than doing useful work (sort of like
> > The Microsoft Office "Ribbon" debacle). And the modern fad of
> replacing
> > text-labeled icons with pure icons means that no one can know for
> sure
> > what they mean, no matter what language they speak. (Plus, "hovering"
> > over the icon to get the tool-tip wastes more time.) Not all users
> have
> > to make do with tiny smartphone screens which don't have the space
> for
> > labeled icons.
> >
> > The move to Quantum also required some really critical add-ons, such
> as
> > NoScript, to be totally reimplemented, and made many other add-ons
> > (such as Classic Theme Restore) apparently impossible. In the case of
> > NoScript, there may have been a period where the overall security of
> > using Firefox suffered in spite of the more secure internal structure
> > of Quantum.
> >
> > And speaking of security, although the idea of requiring add-ons to
> be
> > signed by Mozilla (only!) may be good for the consumer versions of
> > Firefox, it is totally inappropriate for the *Enterprise* version
> > (ESR). It means that any organization that wants add-ons that *need*
> to
> > be kept private can't use Firefox at all. The notion that they could
> > use a local build or an unofficial build (daily etc.) could mean that
> > they are violating some other corporate or government regulation
> > concerning what software they are allowed to use. And how would one
> > even *find* the daily etc. build that is essentially identical to the
> > release build?
> >
> > Since ESR is for enterprise use, surely it should be possible to
> allow
> > enterprise-private add-ons to be loaded in ESR if their *hash* is
> signed
> > by Mozilla. (Mozilla should not be in the business of trying to
> protect
> > enterprises from software they themselves write.) In other words, an
> > enterprise would just submit a hash of the add-on XPI to Mozilla the
> > way they now can submit the whole XPI. Then if so configured (e.g.,
> via
> > about:config) the ESR version of Firefox would allow the add-on to be
> > loaded iff its hash passed the signature test. To add to "public
> > safety", Firefox could display a caveat stating that the add-on
> belongs
> > to XYZ Corp. and is in no way certified by Mozilla. Plus, of course,
> > such hash-signed add-ons would never be hosted by Mozilla.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:54:28 +
> > Ramkrishna Reddy D S  > > wrote:
> >
> >  > Hi Mike,
> >  >
> >  > Less major updates would be good as it's hard for us to manage.
> >  >
> >  > Regards,
> >  > Ram
> >  >
> >  > Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer
> >  >
> >  > On 17-Aug-2019 12:16 AM, Mike Kaply  > > wrote:
> >  > I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a
> >  > couple things I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if
> you'd
> >  > like to continue to receive these kind of updates, you can follow
> the
> >  > instructions at the end of this email.
> >  >
> >  > Legacy Browser Support for Windows now
> >  >
> > available!<
> https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=0ab11a4d-5665120e-0ab15ad6-86a1150bc3ba-e41f2431dfb71a8b&q=1&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmozilla%2Flegacy-browser-support%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fv1.0
>

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Robert Marcano]

On 8/19/19 12:31 PM, Mike Kaply wrote:
The Firefox ESR has always supported turning off extension signing so 
you can install local extensions.


I wish it wasn't an on or off switch, but more a list of allowed 
certificates (hashes?), and be able to disable Mozilla's certificates 
That way you can allow your users to use approved internal extensions 
without giving them the privilege to usa any Mozilla approved ones or 
install random XPIs without signatures




Mike

On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:58 AM Paul Kosinski via Enterprise 
mailto:enterprise@mozilla.org>> wrote:


As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer stability to
new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes to the User
Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google started it
so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their computing
environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic Theme
Restorer could fix that.

The move to Quantum killed much of the ability to make Firefox look the
way the user wanted and was used to. This has meant that users had to
learn the new interface rather than doing useful work (sort of like
The Microsoft Office "Ribbon" debacle). And the modern fad of replacing
text-labeled icons with pure icons means that no one can know for sure
what they mean, no matter what language they speak. (Plus, "hovering"
over the icon to get the tool-tip wastes more time.) Not all users have
to make do with tiny smartphone screens which don't have the space for
labeled icons.

The move to Quantum also required some really critical add-ons, such as
NoScript, to be totally reimplemented, and made many other add-ons
(such as Classic Theme Restore) apparently impossible. In the case of
NoScript, there may have been a period where the overall security of
using Firefox suffered in spite of the more secure internal structure
of Quantum.

And speaking of security, although the idea of requiring add-ons to be
signed by Mozilla (only!) may be good for the consumer versions of
Firefox, it is totally inappropriate for the *Enterprise* version
(ESR). It means that any organization that wants add-ons that *need* to
be kept private can't use Firefox at all. The notion that they could
use a local build or an unofficial build (daily etc.) could mean that
they are violating some other corporate or government regulation
concerning what software they are allowed to use. And how would one
even *find* the daily etc. build that is essentially identical to the
release build?

Since ESR is for enterprise use, surely it should be possible to allow
enterprise-private add-ons to be loaded in ESR if their *hash* is signed
by Mozilla. (Mozilla should not be in the business of trying to protect
enterprises from software they themselves write.) In other words, an
enterprise would just submit a hash of the add-on XPI to Mozilla the
way they now can submit the whole XPI. Then if so configured (e.g., via
about:config) the ESR version of Firefox would allow the add-on to be
loaded iff its hash passed the signature test. To add to "public
safety", Firefox could display a caveat stating that the add-on belongs
to XYZ Corp. and is in no way certified by Mozilla. Plus, of course,
such hash-signed add-ons would never be hosted by Mozilla.





On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:54:28 +
Ramkrishna Reddy D S mailto:ramkrishna.reddy@ericsson.com>> wrote:

 > Hi Mike,
 >
 > Less major updates would be good as it's hard for us to manage.
 >
 > Regards,
 > Ram
 >
 > Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer
 >
 > On 17-Aug-2019 12:16 AM, Mike Kaply mailto:mka...@mozilla.com>> wrote:
 > I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a
 > couple things I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd
 > like to continue to receive these kind of updates, you can follow the
 > instructions at the end of this email.
 >
 > Legacy Browser Support for Windows now
 >

available!
 >
 > It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and
 > apps running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser
 > for it to work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will
 > allow you to easily switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of
 > choice. You can add websites to the policy and when your users try to
 > access the site via the URL bar or a link, it will open in the legacy
 > browser automatically. Legacy Browser Support requires a native
 > component installed via MSI as well as an extension.
 >
 > Share your though

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Timo Pietilä]

On 19.8.2019 18.23, James M. Pulver wrote:


On 8/19/19 6:46 AM, Timo Pietilä wrote:

On 18.8.2019 18.58, Paul Kosinski via Enterprise wrote:

As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer stability to
new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes to the User
Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google started it
so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their computing
environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic Theme
Restorer could fix that.


Two things that have prevented me to change to google chrome are 
ability to restore tabs on bottom and bookmark sidebar which chrome 
doesn't have.
Vivaldi helps with that, though Vivaldi (and chromium) have poor 
enterprise support for any policies compared to CCK2 in old FF ESR.


In terms of Chrome directly - I don't really want to be tied into 
Google's ecosystem even more, certainly not as an IT choice vs a user 
choice.


That was speaking from personal preference, not anything to do with IT. 
Google way of doing things isn't my choice either for IT. Actually it 
would not be my personal choice either. Firefox is still best, I just 
hope it stays that way. Enterprise support maintains home use for 
Firefox so keep the good work up for it.


Timo Pietilä
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Paul Kosinski via Enterprise]

You seem to be correct that ESR still allows Extension Signing to be
disabled in the usual way. And that's great! (It saves my trying modify
the two omni.ja files to achieve that effect.)

Firefox documentation, however, is not clear in this regard. There have
been a whole bunch of stern warnings appearing that Extension Signing
will be enforced starting with Firefox 48. Looking at the latest
(August 16, 2019) of https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing,
we see the following paragraphs (in order, but not all contiguous):

  Firefox 48: (Pushed from Firefox 46). Release and Beta versions of
  Firefox for Desktop will not allow unsigned extensions to be
  installed, with no override. Firefox for Android will enforce add-on
  signing, and will retain a preference — which will be removed in a
  future release — to allow the user to disable signing enforcement.

[skip ...]

  Will there be a setting or other overrides to disable signature
  checks? Firefox Release and Beta versions will not have any way to
  disable signature checks. Signature checks can be disabled in other
  versions, as described in detail below.

  What are my options if I want to install unsigned extensions in
  Firefox? The Nightly and Developer Edition versions of Firefox have a
  preference to disable signature enforcement. There are also be
  special unbranded versions of Release and Beta that have this
  preference, so that add-on developers can work on their add-ons
  without having to sign every build. To disable signature checks, you
  will need to set the xpinstall.signatures.required preference to
  "false". type about:config into the URL bar in Firefox in the Search
  box type xpinstall.signatures.required double-click the preference,
  or right-click and selected "Toggle", to set it to false.

  How do the unbranded versions of Firefox work? They work just like
  Firefox, with two differences: they have a setting to disable
  mandatory signature checks, and they don't have the Firefox name and
  logo (instead using a generic name and logo). These builds are
  available in the en-US locale only.

  What about private add-ons used in enterprise environments? The ESR
  release supports signing starting with version 45-based releases.
  Signing enforcement is enabled by default in these releases, and
  enforcement can be disabled using the xpinstall.signatures.required
  preference.

In these paragraphs, "Nightly", "Developer" and "unbranded..." are
links (and thus highlighted), but "ESR" isn't.

Futhermore, you must descend 4 levels of links from the main ESR page at
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/ (most of them
non-obvious), to find out how to allow unsigned add-ons in the new ESR
Firefox. (It turns out to be the same mathod as before.)

Also, https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-firefox
(which has no explicit date, but mentions May 5, 2019), does say that
the Extension Signature requirement can be disabled in ESR, as well as
Developer and Nightly. 

Finally, it seems that although ESR means "Enterprise Support Release"
it is *not* considered to be a "Release" in much of the documentation.
This is quite confusing, and needs clarification and cleanup.



On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 11:31:36 -0500
Mike Kaply  wrote:

> The Firefox ESR has always supported turning off extension signing so
> you can install local extensions.
> 
> Mike
> 
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:58 AM Paul Kosinski via Enterprise <
> enterprise@mozilla.org> wrote:
> 
> > As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer
> > stability to new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous
> > changes to the User Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I
> > think Google started it so that users would view the Web (and hence
> > Google) as their computing environment, rather than Windows et al.
> > But at least Classic Theme Restorer could fix that.
> >
> > The move to Quantum killed much of the ability to make Firefox look
> > the way the user wanted and was used to. This has meant that users
> > had to learn the new interface rather than doing useful work (sort
> > of like The Microsoft Office "Ribbon" debacle). And the modern fad
> > of replacing text-labeled icons with pure icons means that no one
> > can know for sure what they mean, no matter what language they
> > speak. (Plus, "hovering" over the icon to get the tool-tip wastes
> > more time.) Not all users have to make do with tiny smartphone
> > screens which don't have the space for labeled icons.
> >
> > The move to Quantum also required some really critical add-ons,
> > such as NoScript, to be totally reimplemented, and made many other
> > add-ons (such as Classic Theme Restore) apparently impossible. In
> > the case of NoScript, there may have been a period where the
> > overall security of using Firefox suffered in spite of the more
> > secure internal structure of Quantum.
> >
> > And

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Mike Kaply]

The Firefox ESR has always supported turning off extension signing so you
can install local extensions.

Mike

On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:58 AM Paul Kosinski via Enterprise <
enterprise@mozilla.org> wrote:

> As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer stability to
> new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes to the User
> Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google started it
> so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their computing
> environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic Theme
> Restorer could fix that.
>
> The move to Quantum killed much of the ability to make Firefox look the
> way the user wanted and was used to. This has meant that users had to
> learn the new interface rather than doing useful work (sort of like
> The Microsoft Office "Ribbon" debacle). And the modern fad of replacing
> text-labeled icons with pure icons means that no one can know for sure
> what they mean, no matter what language they speak. (Plus, "hovering"
> over the icon to get the tool-tip wastes more time.) Not all users have
> to make do with tiny smartphone screens which don't have the space for
> labeled icons.
>
> The move to Quantum also required some really critical add-ons, such as
> NoScript, to be totally reimplemented, and made many other add-ons
> (such as Classic Theme Restore) apparently impossible. In the case of
> NoScript, there may have been a period where the overall security of
> using Firefox suffered in spite of the more secure internal structure
> of Quantum.
>
> And speaking of security, although the idea of requiring add-ons to be
> signed by Mozilla (only!) may be good for the consumer versions of
> Firefox, it is totally inappropriate for the *Enterprise* version
> (ESR). It means that any organization that wants add-ons that *need* to
> be kept private can't use Firefox at all. The notion that they could
> use a local build or an unofficial build (daily etc.) could mean that
> they are violating some other corporate or government regulation
> concerning what software they are allowed to use. And how would one
> even *find* the daily etc. build that is essentially identical to the
> release build?
>
> Since ESR is for enterprise use, surely it should be possible to allow
> enterprise-private add-ons to be loaded in ESR if their *hash* is signed
> by Mozilla. (Mozilla should not be in the business of trying to protect
> enterprises from software they themselves write.) In other words, an
> enterprise would just submit a hash of the add-on XPI to Mozilla the
> way they now can submit the whole XPI. Then if so configured (e.g., via
> about:config) the ESR version of Firefox would allow the add-on to be
> loaded iff its hash passed the signature test. To add to "public
> safety", Firefox could display a caveat stating that the add-on belongs
> to XYZ Corp. and is in no way certified by Mozilla. Plus, of course,
> such hash-signed add-ons would never be hosted by Mozilla.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:54:28 +
> Ramkrishna Reddy D S  wrote:
>
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > Less major updates would be good as it's hard for us to manage.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ram
> >
> > Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer
> >
> > On 17-Aug-2019 12:16 AM, Mike Kaply  wrote:
> > I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a
> > couple things I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd
> > like to continue to receive these kind of updates, you can follow the
> > instructions at the end of this email.
> >
> > Legacy Browser Support for Windows now
> > available!<
> https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=0ab11a4d-5665120e-0ab15ad6-86a1150bc3ba-e41f2431dfb71a8b&q=1&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmozilla%2Flegacy-browser-support%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Fv1.0
> >
> >
> > It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and
> > apps running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser
> > for it to work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will
> > allow you to easily switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of
> > choice. You can add websites to the policy and when your users try to
> > access the site via the URL bar or a link, it will open in the legacy
> > browser automatically. Legacy Browser Support requires a native
> > component installed via MSI as well as an extension.
> >
> > Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence
> >
> > We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox
> > Extended Support releases.
> >
> > Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would
> > like to understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each
> > year, would help meet the needs of you and your organization.
> >
> > We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port
> > features and functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of
> > web app compatibility issues that arise due to the ESR being too
> > outdated. While the ESR helps lower QA ove

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[James M. Pulver]

On 8/19/19 6:46 AM, Timo Pietilä wrote:

On 18.8.2019 18.58, Paul Kosinski via Enterprise wrote:

As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer stability to
new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes to the User
Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google started it
so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their computing
environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic Theme
Restorer could fix that.


Two things that have prevented me to change to google chrome are ability 
to restore tabs on bottom and bookmark sidebar which chrome doesn't have.
Vivaldi helps with that, though Vivaldi (and chromium) have poor 
enterprise support for any policies compared to CCK2 in old FF ESR.


In terms of Chrome directly - I don't really want to be tied into 
Google's ecosystem even more, certainly not as an IT choice vs a user 
choice.




James Pulver
CLASSE Computer Group
Cornell University
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Mike Kaply]

Documentation is here:

https://support.mozilla.org/kb/legacy-browser-support-extension-windows

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 4:20 AM Dimas Streich (Informàtica Trueta) <
dstreich.girona@gencat.cat> wrote:

> Legacy Browser Support is a very good new!! We were waiting some bug fixes
> to be resolved in IE View addon to update Firefox to our users but with
> this official solution maybe we can switch now.
>
> Where I can find all the documentation?
>
> Thx!
>
> El 16/8/2019 a les 20:45, Mike Kaply ha escrit:
>
> I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a couple
> things I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd like to
> continue to receive these kind of updates, you can follow the instructions
> at the end of this email.
>
> *Legacy Browser Support for Windows now available!
> *
>
> It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and apps
> running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser for it to
> work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will allow you to easily
> switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of choice. You can add
> websites to the policy and when your users try to access the site via the
> URL bar or a link, it will open in the legacy browser automatically. Legacy
> Browser Support requires a native component installed via MSI as well as an
> extension.
>
> *Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence*
>
> We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox Extended
> Support releases.
>
> Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would like
> to understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each year, would
> help meet the needs of you and your organization.
>
> We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port features
> and functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of web app
> compatibility issues that arise due to the ESR being too outdated. While
> the ESR helps lower QA overhead through less frequent updates, would a
> biannual release bring more benefits to you? Please chime in on this
> feedback form .
>
> *Want to receive enterprise news?*
>
> This is our second note to you in the past few weeks and we would like to
> share more news about our enterprise work as new features and offerings are
> developed. If my recent emails have been helpful, I’d love to have you 
> complete
> this brief form 
> to receive periodic news from our enterprise team.
>
> Thanks
> Mike Kaply
> Technical Lead, Enterprise Firefox
>
> ___
> Enterprise mailing 
> listEnterprise@mozilla.orghttps://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
> enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>
>
> --
>
>
> *Dimas Streich i Colomeda * Unitat de Tecnologies de la Informació i
> Comunicació
> Hospital Universitari de Girona Doctor Josep Trueta
> Institut Català de la Salut Girona
> Departament de Salut | Generalitat de Catalunya
> Av.França s/n | 17007 Girona
> dstreich.girona@gencat.cat | http://www.hospitaltrueta.cat
>   
>   
> 
>
> Aquest missatge s'adreça exclusivament a la persona destinatària i pot
> contenir informació privilegiada o confidencial. Si no sou el destinatari
> indicat, us recordem que la utilització, divulgació i/o còpia sense
> autorització està prohibida en virtut de la legislació vigent. Si heu rebut
> aquest missatge per error, feu-nos-ho saber immediatament per aquesta via i
> destruïu-lo.
> Abans d'imprimir aquest correu, assegureu-vos que és realment necessari.
> ___
> Enterprise mailing list
> Enterprise@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to
> enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Tiago Marques Delboni]

Legacy Browser Support seems to be very helpful, specially if it can 
span old portable FF from PortableApps.


About the release pace, we are tending to replace an EOL ESR release by 
another, once a year (eg.: 52.9 -> 60.9).


*Tiago Marques Delboni*
Gerência de Aplicações e Suporte a Clientes / GTI
(31) 2108-7700

Assembleia Legislativa de Minas Gerais  	 
Facebook da Assembleia  
Twitter da Assembleia  Instagram da 
Assembleia  Youtube da 
Assembleia 


Em 16/08/2019 15:45, Mike Kaply escreveu:
I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a 
couple things I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd 
like to continue to receive these kind of updates, you can follow the 
instructions at the end of this email.


*Legacy Browser Support for Windows now available! 
*


It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and 
apps running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser 
for it to work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will 
allow you to easily switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of 
choice. You can add websites to the policy and when your users try to 
access the site via the URL bar or a link, it will open in the legacy 
browser automatically. Legacy Browser Support requires a native 
component installed via MSI as well as an extension.


*Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence*

We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox Extended 
Support releases.


Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would 
like to understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each 
year, would help meet the needs of you and your organization.


We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port 
features and functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of 
web app compatibility issues that arise due to the ESR being too 
outdated. While the ESR helps lower QA overhead through less frequent 
updates, would a biannual release bring more benefits to you? Please 
chime in on this feedback form .


*Want to receive enterprise news?*
*
*
This is our second note to you in the past few weeks and we would like 
to share more news about our enterprise work as new features and 
offerings are developed. If my recent emails have been helpful, I’d 
love to have you complete this brief form 
 to receive 
periodic news from our enterprise team.


Thanks
Mike Kaply
Technical Lead, Enterprise Firefox

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"


___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Timo Pietilä]

On 18.8.2019 18.58, Paul Kosinski via Enterprise wrote:

As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer stability to
new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes to the User
Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google started it
so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their computing
environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic Theme
Restorer could fix that.


Two things that have prevented me to change to google chrome are ability 
to restore tabs on bottom and bookmark sidebar which chrome doesn't have.


As for ESR I wouldn't mind if there were two releases / year if you have 
half a year overlap between versions so that you can switch when FF is 
mature and actually ready for corporate use.


Like the Bug 1571033 that still isn't fixed and which is total 
showstopper. It is getting awfully close to forced upgrade because FF60 
is ending support, and that bug would force us to either not set default 
homepage (not really an option), block FF use until it is fixed (which 
means all the future browser users would switch to other browsers which 
in turn would lead to FF being dead to them for all eternity) or drop 
corporate support of FF completely and let admin users to use FF at 
their own risk as it is which again would kill FF for users.


Users use familiar browser at home, if they can't use same browser at 
work they switch their home browser to match their work browser. It 
really doesn't work other way around. Not properly supporting corporates 
will kill FF because frankly there isn't much competitive edge on FF 
anymore. For example Microsoft pages work better in Chrome than they do 
in FF. FF dying isn't something I would like to see since I have been 
using FF before it was FF.


Timo Pietilä
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Informàtica Trueta]

  
  
Legacy Browser Support is
  a very good new!! We were waiting some bug fixes to be resolved in
  IE View addon to update Firefox to our users but with this
  official solution maybe we can switch now.
  
  Where I can find all the documentation?
  
  Thx!

El 16/8/2019 a les 20:45, Mike Kaply ha
  escrit:


  
  
I know this is generally considered a support list, but I
  have a couple things I'd like to let you know about. Going
  forward, if you'd like to continue to receive these kind of
  updates, you can follow the instructions at the end of this
  email.



Legacy Browser
  Support for Windows now available!


It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites
and apps running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a
legacy browser for it to work. You can now get Legacy Browser
Support which will allow you to easily switch between Firefox
and your legacy browser of choice. You can add websites to the
policy and when your users try to access the site via the URL
bar or a link, it will open in the legacy browser automatically.
Legacy Browser Support requires a native component installed via
MSI as well as an extension.

Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence


We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox
Extended Support releases.

Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We
would like to understand if a shorter life cycle, with more
releases each year, would help meet the needs of you and your
organization.

We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back
port features and functionality to the ESR and will reduce
occurrence of web app compatibility issues that arise due to the
ESR being too outdated. While the ESR helps lower QA overhead
through less frequent updates, would a biannual release bring
more benefits to you? Please chime in on this feedback form.


Want to receive enterprise news?

  
This is our second note to you in the past few weeks and we
  would like to share more news about our enterprise work as new
  features and offerings are developed. If my recent emails have
  been helpful, I’d love to have you complete this brief
form to receive periodic news from our enterprise team.



Thanks

  


Mike Kaply
Technical Lead, Enterprise Firefox
  
  
  
  ___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"



-- 
  
  
Dimas Streich i Colomeda

Unitat de Tecnologies de la Informació i Comunicació
Hospital Universitari de Girona Doctor Josep Trueta
Institut Català de la Salut Girona
Departament de Salut | Generalitat de Catalunya
Av.França s/n | 17007 Girona
dstreich.girona@gencat.cat
| http://www.hospitaltrueta.cat


Aquest missatge s'adreça exclusivament a la persona destinatària
i pot contenir informació privilegiada o
confidencial. Si no sou el destinatari indicat, us recordem que
la utilització, divulgació i/o còpia
sense autorització està prohibida en virtut de la legislació
vigent. Si heu rebut aquest missatge per error, feu-nos-ho saber
immediatament per aquesta via i destruïu-lo.
Abans d'imprimir aquest correu, assegureu-vos que és realment
necessari.
  
  

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Paul Kosinski via Enterprise]

As a long-time Firefox user, I went to ESR because I prefer stability to
new features, and I especially don't like gratuitous changes to the User
Interface. The move to Tabs on Top was ugly: I think Google started it
so that users would view the Web (and hence Google) as their computing
environment, rather than Windows et al. But at least Classic Theme
Restorer could fix that.

The move to Quantum killed much of the ability to make Firefox look the
way the user wanted and was used to. This has meant that users had to
learn the new interface rather than doing useful work (sort of like
The Microsoft Office "Ribbon" debacle). And the modern fad of replacing
text-labeled icons with pure icons means that no one can know for sure
what they mean, no matter what language they speak. (Plus, "hovering"
over the icon to get the tool-tip wastes more time.) Not all users have
to make do with tiny smartphone screens which don't have the space for
labeled icons.

The move to Quantum also required some really critical add-ons, such as
NoScript, to be totally reimplemented, and made many other add-ons
(such as Classic Theme Restore) apparently impossible. In the case of
NoScript, there may have been a period where the overall security of
using Firefox suffered in spite of the more secure internal structure
of Quantum.

And speaking of security, although the idea of requiring add-ons to be
signed by Mozilla (only!) may be good for the consumer versions of
Firefox, it is totally inappropriate for the *Enterprise* version
(ESR). It means that any organization that wants add-ons that *need* to
be kept private can't use Firefox at all. The notion that they could
use a local build or an unofficial build (daily etc.) could mean that
they are violating some other corporate or government regulation
concerning what software they are allowed to use. And how would one
even *find* the daily etc. build that is essentially identical to the
release build?

Since ESR is for enterprise use, surely it should be possible to allow
enterprise-private add-ons to be loaded in ESR if their *hash* is signed
by Mozilla. (Mozilla should not be in the business of trying to protect
enterprises from software they themselves write.) In other words, an
enterprise would just submit a hash of the add-on XPI to Mozilla the
way they now can submit the whole XPI. Then if so configured (e.g., via
about:config) the ESR version of Firefox would allow the add-on to be
loaded iff its hash passed the signature test. To add to "public
safety", Firefox could display a caveat stating that the add-on belongs
to XYZ Corp. and is in no way certified by Mozilla. Plus, of course,
such hash-signed add-ons would never be hosted by Mozilla.





On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:54:28 +
Ramkrishna Reddy D S  wrote:

> Hi Mike,
> 
> Less major updates would be good as it's hard for us to manage.
> 
> Regards,
> Ram
> 
> Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer
> 
> On 17-Aug-2019 12:16 AM, Mike Kaply  wrote:
> I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a
> couple things I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd
> like to continue to receive these kind of updates, you can follow the
> instructions at the end of this email.
> 
> Legacy Browser Support for Windows now
> available!
> 
> It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and
> apps running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser
> for it to work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will
> allow you to easily switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of
> choice. You can add websites to the policy and when your users try to
> access the site via the URL bar or a link, it will open in the legacy
> browser automatically. Legacy Browser Support requires a native
> component installed via MSI as well as an extension.
> 
> Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence
> 
> We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox
> Extended Support releases.
> 
> Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would
> like to understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each
> year, would help meet the needs of you and your organization.
> 
> We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port
> features and functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of
> web app compatibility issues that arise due to the ESR being too
> outdated. While the ESR helps lower QA overhead through less frequent
> updates, would a biannual release bring more benefits to you? Please
> chime in on this feedback form.
> 
> Want to receive enterprise news?
> 
> This is our second note to you in the past few weeks and we would
> like to share more news about our enterprise work as new features and
> offerings are developed. If 

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Ramkrishna Reddy D S]

Hi Mike,

Less major updates would be good as it's hard for us to manage.

Regards,
Ram

Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer

On 17-Aug-2019 12:16 AM, Mike Kaply  wrote:
I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a couple things 
I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd like to continue to 
receive these kind of updates, you can follow the instructions at the end of 
this email.

Legacy Browser Support for Windows now 
available!

It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and apps 
running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser for it to 
work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will allow you to easily 
switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of choice. You can add websites 
to the policy and when your users try to access the site via the URL bar or a 
link, it will open in the legacy browser automatically. Legacy Browser Support 
requires a native component installed via MSI as well as an extension.

Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence

We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox Extended Support 
releases.

Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would like to 
understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each year, would help 
meet the needs of you and your organization.

We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port features and 
functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of web app compatibility 
issues that arise due to the ESR being too outdated. While the ESR helps lower 
QA overhead through less frequent updates, would a biannual release bring more 
benefits to you? Please chime in on this feedback 
form.

Want to receive enterprise news?

This is our second note to you in the past few weeks and we would like to share 
more news about our enterprise work as new features and offerings are 
developed. If my recent emails have been helpful, I’d love to have you complete 
this brief form to 
receive periodic news from our enterprise team.

Thanks
[https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif]
Mike Kaply
Technical Lead, Enterprise Firefox
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[James M. Pulver]

Honestly, I would like less releases of new major versions. It's a pain when 
the whole management system changes, or you have to fix your config for the new 
version. It's easy to push a patch, but if you're going to change how it works, 
do it less.

James Pulver


From: Enterprise  on behalf of Mike Kaply 

Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 2:45 PM
To: Mozilla.org
Subject: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a couple things 
I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd like to continue to 
receive these kind of updates, you can follow the instructions at the end of 
this email.

Legacy Browser Support for Windows now 
available!<https://github.com/mozilla/legacy-browser-support/releases/tag/v1.0>

It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and apps 
running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser for it to 
work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will allow you to easily 
switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of choice. You can add websites 
to the policy and when your users try to access the site via the URL bar or a 
link, it will open in the legacy browser automatically. Legacy Browser Support 
requires a native component installed via MSI as well as an extension.

Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence

We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox Extended Support 
releases.

Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would like to 
understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each year, would help 
meet the needs of you and your organization.

We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port features and 
functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of web app compatibility 
issues that arise due to the ESR being too outdated. While the ESR helps lower 
QA overhead through less frequent updates, would a biannual release bring more 
benefits to you? Please chime in on this feedback 
form<https://forms.gle/jdwWYKQ3inqP3jwL9>.

Want to receive enterprise news?

This is our second note to you in the past few weeks and we would like to share 
more news about our enterprise work as new features and offerings are 
developed. If my recent emails have been helpful, I’d love to have you complete 
this brief form<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/enterprise/signup/> to 
receive periodic news from our enterprise team.

Thanks
[https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif]
Mike Kaply
Technical Lead, Enterprise Firefox
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Mike Kaply]

I know this is generally considered a support list, but I have a couple
things I'd like to let you know about. Going forward, if you'd like to
continue to receive these kind of updates, you can follow the instructions
at the end of this email.

*Legacy Browser Support for Windows now available!
*

It is quite possible that you still require the use of websites and apps
running ActiveX, Java, or Silverlight that need a legacy browser for it to
work. You can now get Legacy Browser Support which will allow you to easily
switch between Firefox and your legacy browser of choice. You can add
websites to the policy and when your users try to access the site via the
URL bar or a link, it will open in the legacy browser automatically. Legacy
Browser Support requires a native component installed via MSI as well as an
extension.

*Share your thoughts on ESR Release Cadence*

We would love your feedback in our current cadence of Firefox Extended
Support releases.

Today, an ESR life cycle spans between 9 months to a year. We would like to
understand if a shorter life cycle, with more releases each year, would
help meet the needs of you and your organization.

We believe faster cycles will allow more flexibility to back port features
and functionality to the ESR and will reduce occurrence of web app
compatibility issues that arise due to the ESR being too outdated. While
the ESR helps lower QA overhead through less frequent updates, would a
biannual release bring more benefits to you? Please chime in on this
feedback form .

*Want to receive enterprise news?*

This is our second note to you in the past few weeks and we would like to
share more news about our enterprise work as new features and offerings are
developed. If my recent emails have been helpful, I’d love to have you complete
this brief form 
to receive periodic news from our enterprise team.

Thanks
Mike Kaply
Technical Lead, Enterprise Firefox
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[ismail morady]

Windows
Windows


___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Ira L. Jacobson]

What is "the satellite translation of Arabic "?

2017-09-05 21:12 GMT+03:00 جوانة القيسي :

> اريد اشتراك في هذا البرنامج القمر  الصناعي واريد ترجمة للعربية
>
> ___
> Enterprise mailing list
> Enterprise@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/
> listinfo/enterprise or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[جوانة القيسي]

اريد اشتراك في هذا البرنامج القمر  الصناعي واريد ترجمة للعربية
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Greg Cauch]

--
Sent from myMail for Android___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Greg Cauch]

--
Sent from myMail for Android___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[yusa...@gmail.com]

By alphagravy on 


Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Éric Périard]

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org<mailto:Enterprise@mozilla.org>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org<mailto:enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org> with a 
subject of "unsubscribe"


From: Enterprise [mailto:enterprise-boun...@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Daniel 
Kammerer
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 1:33 PM
To: enterprise@mozilla.org
Subject: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

Jo Please unsubscribe my Email dein the list



kam.stuttg...@googlemail.com<mailto:kam.stuttg...@googlemail.com>


Thank you in Advance
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Daniel Kammerer]

Jo Please unsubscribe my Email dein the list



kam.stuttg...@googlemail.com


Thank you in Advance
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Krzysztof Wirga]

krzychuwir...@gmail.com
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Nick Boyce]

On 23 March 2017 at 09:47, Jeffrey Rust  wrote:

> Google Hangouts does not work on the non-ESR version.
> I downloaded ESR and over wrote the older version.
> I am still unable to use G hangouts voice and video.
> Any suggestions?

If you were able to clarify "does not work" by explaining what
*doesn't* happen that *should*, or what *does* happen that *should
not*, then you'll improve the chance of getting some useful responses.


Nick
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Jeffrey Rust]

Google Hangouts does not work on the non-ESR version.

I downloaded ESR and over wrote the older version.

I am still unable to use G hangouts voice and video.

Any suggestions?
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[andres Perez]

andes perez
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Eldar Hafizović]

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[The Wanderer]

On 2017-03-10 at 11:29, Disaster Master wrote:

> And please, please, to all of you who feel obligated to respond to
> these kinds of posts on the list...
> 
> DON'T.
> 
> Please send direct to the ... person ... displaying their ignorance,
> and spare the rest of us the noise.

I ordinarily don't respond to such posts at all, but when I do, I
sometimes feel it appropriate to CC the list so that other people know
that such a response has already been sent and that they don't need to
send one of their own.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Disaster Master]

And please, please, to all of you who feel obligated to respond to these
kinds of posts on the list...

DON'T.

Please send direct to the ... person ... displaying their ignorance, and
spare the rest of us the noise.


On Fri Mar 10 2017 11:26:06 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Marie
Kennedy (Staff)  wrote:
> Please, please, to all of you who would like to unsubscribe, this is
> how to do it. It's at the bottom of each message. Read the following
> carefully before spamming everyone. 
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, please
> visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email
> to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org
>  with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>
> Marie Kennedy
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Marie Kennedy (Staff)]

Please, please, to all of you who would like to unsubscribe, this is how to do 
it. It's at the bottom of each message. Read the following carefully before 
spamming everyone.

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org<mailto:enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org> with a 
subject of "unsubscribe"

Marie Kennedy

_
From: G. Madiedo mailto:gk.mad...@aon.at>>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 6:10 AM
Subject: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)
To: mailto:enterprise@mozilla.org>>


Remove me from this list
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org<mailto:Enterprise@mozilla.org>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org<mailto:enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org> with a 
subject of "unsubscribe"


___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[The Wanderer]

On 2017-03-10 at 09:10, G. Madiedo wrote:

> Remove me from this list

Remove yourself from the list, by following the instructions which
appear at the bottom of every mail through the list:

> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to
> enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Note the important difference between "enterprise-request" and
"enterprise".

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[G. Madiedo]

Unsubscribe 
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[G. Madiedo]

Remove me from the listOn Mar 10, 2017 15:13, "G. Madiedo"  
wrote:
>
> Remove me from the list 
> ___ 
> Enterprise mailing list 
> Enterprise@mozilla.org 
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
> enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe" 
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[G. Madiedo]

UnsubscribeOn Mar 10, 2017 15:10, "G. Madiedo"  wrote:
>
> Remove me from this list 
> ___ 
> Enterprise mailing list 
> Enterprise@mozilla.org 
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
> enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe" 
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[G. Madiedo]

Remove me from the list
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[G. Madiedo]

Remove me from this list
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[RJRiley.C]

On 3/8/2017 12:04 PM, John Hoepfner wrote:

take me off your ist



___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"


Scroll to the bottom of any message for instructions on how to leave the 
list.  Then write a hundred times "I can not believe I missed this."




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[John Hoepfner]

take me off your ist

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[andres Perez]

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Rick James]

Its. Sodcjames
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[andres Perez]

El 1 ene. 2017 22:20, "andres Perez"  escribió:


___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/
listinfo/enterprise or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with
a subject of "unsubscribe"
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[andres Perez]

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Tulsi Dulal]

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[s.Mubarak Ali]

Ji
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[David]

Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com


___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"