XulRunner is dead now

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

XulRunner is dead now

Georg Maaß
As I see the version numbering of Xulrunner now running also 5.0, 6.0
etc. XulRunner is dead now. Because for XulRunner applications it is
importent to have a long time API freeze with regular security fixes,
because otherwise each update of XulRunner done to just get the newest
security fixes requires to test the whole application each time to know
whether there are new incompatibilities, which usually was not the case
in former times for i.e. 1.9.x.y releases with increasing y but same x.

Please rethink this, because otherwise XulRunner applications end up to
1.9.2.y and can not be updated to 2.0 and newer releases. No one wants
to run into surprize trouble each few month, when just trying to get the
newest security fixed.
_______________________________________________
dev-planning mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-planning
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: XulRunner is dead now

Mark Finkle
On Apr 30, 2:25 pm, Georg Maaß <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As I see the version numbering of Xulrunner now running also 5.0, 6.0
> etc. XulRunner is dead now. Because for XulRunner applications it is
> importent to have a long time API freeze with regular security fixes,
> because otherwise each update of XulRunner done to just get the newest
> security fixes requires to test the whole application each time to know
> whether there are new incompatibilities, which usually was not the case
> in former times for i.e. 1.9.x.y releases with increasing y but same x.
>
> Please rethink this, because otherwise XulRunner applications end up to
> 1.9.2.y and can not be updated to 2.0 and newer releases. No one wants
> to run into surprize trouble each few month, when just trying to get the
> newest security fixed.

I assume you are suggesting that since Firefox and XULRunner are
moving to a rapid release cycle that XULRunner based applications will
have to also keep up at the faster cycle. But in fact you'd be happier
if your XUL application could just keep using the same old XULRunner
for years, with just security updates. You'd with no large, breaking
API changes which would likely happen with major release, and more
major releases will be happening in the rapid release world.

Time will tell I guess, but it is likely that Mozilla will not be
applying security updates to releases of Firefox (and XULRunner) that
have little or no users. If the rapid release system works they way we
want it to, a majority of Firefox users will be on the latest stable
release. Yes, this is bad for developers using XULRunner and who would
like to not keep up to date with the latest release.

On the other hand, we should always be encouraging XULRunner
developers to try to stay current. Instead of waiting 2+ years to
update to the latest XULRunner, try to keep at least a few months
behind. You'll have less changes to deal with when you do update to
the latest version. You can also be more active in the trunk
development of XULRunner. Having a community of XULRunner developers
that are 2+ years behind trunk has always been a sore spot with me in
particular. Getting a community working and contributing to trunk will
be beneficial to Mozilla and external developers.

Oh, and XULRunner is not dead. Version 5 and 6 are getting all kinds
of new features.

Finkle
_______________________________________________
dev-planning mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-planning
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: XulRunner is dead now

Robert Kaiser
Mark Finkle schrieb:
> On the other hand, we should always be encouraging XULRunner
> developers to try to stay current. Instead of waiting 2+ years to
> update to the latest XULRunner, try to keep at least a few months
> behind. You'll have less changes to deal with when you do update to
> the latest version.

Esp. that latter point is IMHO a very important to make. With the new
fast cycle it's much easier to update your XULRunner-based application
from one release to the next as changes are way smaller between them.

Robert Kaiser


--
Note that any statements of mine - no matter how passionate - are never
meant to be offensive but very often as food for thought or possible
arguments that we as a community needs answers to. And most of the time,
I even appreciate irony and fun! :)
_______________________________________________
dev-planning mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-planning
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: XulRunner is dead now

Wolfgang Rosenauer-2
Am 02.05.2011 14:44, schrieb Robert Kaiser:

> Mark Finkle schrieb:
>> On the other hand, we should always be encouraging XULRunner
>> developers to try to stay current. Instead of waiting 2+ years to
>> update to the latest XULRunner, try to keep at least a few months
>> behind. You'll have less changes to deal with when you do update to
>> the latest version.
>
> Esp. that latter point is IMHO a very important to make. With the new
> fast cycle it's much easier to update your XULRunner-based application
> from one release to the next as changes are way smaller between them.

Applications shipping xulrunner itself have a chance to adopt the rapid
release cycle.
Distributions which delivered xulrunner to provide Gecko embedding or a
common platform for xul apps are lost now though.


Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
dev-planning mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-planning