Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 4:03 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski < domi...@greysector.net> wrote: > What do you think the appropriate action is when FF57 is released > but NoScript compatible with it isn't? Should I just block FF57 update > and wait for the angry mob to show up at my door? It

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Friday, 17 November 2017 at 18:11, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 5:38 AM, Benjamin Kreuter > wrote: > > > OK, but why are we packaging these addons at all if that is the answer? > > The situation right now is that we have packages that are broken by an

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 08:50:07PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > (I don't understand why we package Firefox addons at all, it seems like > a silly idea. But oh well.) It is useful to get the same addons in all profiles/users on a system and avoids the necessity to update them everywhere

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 05:01:32PM -0500, Benjamin Kreuter wrote: > > Alternatively, rather than block the updates, at least leave the last > > working version in the repository so that users can downgrade to > >

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Benjamin Kreuter wrote: > > Again, why allow addons to be packaged at all if we are not prepared to > block browser updates that break addons? > I don't believe we should be in the business of determining which applications are worthy of

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 05:01:32PM -0500, Benjamin Kreuter wrote: > Alternatively, rather than block the updates, at least leave the last > working version in the repository so that users can downgrade to > something more recent. Right now it looks like F26 users can either > accept Firefox 57 and

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 11:11 -0800, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > If someone wants to package an addon, no problem - but they should > keep it > up-to-date. > > One issue that I think is problematic is test cases for addons within > bodhi > for firefox itself. > You should not hold the release of the

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > > And there is no warning if you click in firefox-57.0-2.fc27.x86_64 on any > add-on that it is installing a non-Fedora-signed add-on. > > (Then there is also "Update Add-ons Automatically" turned on by default

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 19:53:43 +0100, Randy Barlow wrote: > On 11/16/2017 11:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > (I don't understand why we package Firefox addons at all, it seems like > > a silly idea. But oh well.) > > I personally like the idea of packaging addons, for the same reasons I > like

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On 11/17/2017 02:11 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > You are correct that not all the addons have free licenses... Lastpass > quickly comes to mind. > Regarding known sources, mozilla does vet all the addons - so if you are > getting > them from mozilla.org they are from a known

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Randy Barlow wrote: > On 11/16/2017 11:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > (I don't understand why we package Firefox addons at all, it seems like > > a silly idea. But oh well.) > > I personally like the idea of packaging addons,

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On 11/16/2017 11:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > (I don't understand why we package Firefox addons at all, it seems like > a silly idea. But oh well.) I personally like the idea of packaging addons, for the same reasons I like getting Firefox from Fedora rather than directly from Mozilla. Some

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 5:38 AM, Benjamin Kreuter wrote: > OK, but why are we packaging these addons at all if that is the answer? > The situation right now is that we have packages that are broken by an > update and a confusing situation for users who try to install

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 21:55 -0800, Gerald B. Cox wrote: > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Adam Williamson ect.org > > wrote: > > > > (I don't understand why we package Firefox addons at all, it seems > > like > > a silly idea. But oh well.) > > > > > > +1 - Yeah,

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 21:59 -0500, Benjamin Kreuter wrote: > > Hi, I just installed this; it breaks the versions of AdBlockPlus, > > HTTPSEverywhere, and Noscript I installed from the Fedora repo. Can we > >

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 21:59 -0500, Benjamin Kreuter wrote: > Hi, I just installed this; it breaks the versions of AdBlockPlus, > HTTPSEverywhere, and Noscript I installed from the Fedora repo. Can we > revert to 56 until 57 at least does not break our own packages? Well, the alternative would be

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

Hi, I just installed this; it breaks the versions of AdBlockPlus, HTTPSEverywhere, and Noscript I installed from the Fedora repo. Can we revert to 56 until 57 at least does not break our own packages? -- Ben On Sat, 2017-11-11 at 20:17 +0100, Silvia Sánchez wrote: > Hi, > I'm using Firefox

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

Hi, I'm using Firefox Quantum in both, Debian and Fedora, and works smoothly. Thanks! 2017-11-06 12:04 GMT+01:00 Vít Ondruch : > > > Dne 6.11.2017 v 11:55 Martin Stransky napsal(a): > > On 11/06/2017 11:50 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >> > >> > >> Dne 12.10.2017 v 10:58 Martin

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

Dne 6.11.2017 v 11:55 Martin Stransky napsal(a): > On 11/06/2017 11:50 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> >> Dne 12.10.2017 v 10:58 Martin Stransky napsal(a): >>> On 10/12/2017 10:52 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:57:20AM +0200, Martin Stransky wrote: > - and

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On 11/06/2017 11:50 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 12.10.2017 v 10:58 Martin Stransky napsal(a): On 10/12/2017 10:52 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:57:20AM +0200, Martin Stransky wrote: - and disabled XUL extensions For people who don't follow the internals of how

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

Dne 12.10.2017 v 10:58 Martin Stransky napsal(a): > On 10/12/2017 10:52 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:57:20AM +0200, Martin Stransky wrote: >>> - and disabled XUL extensions >> >> For people who don't follow the internals of how Firefox works, >> this means all

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On 10/12/2017 11:16 AM, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: and also expect new versions there. Please give it a shot and report any issue to our [1] or Mozilla bugzilla [2]. Hi Martin, Do you want feedback in bodhi as

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: > and also expect new versions there. Please give it a shot and report any > issue to our [1] or Mozilla bugzilla [2]. Hi Martin, Do you want feedback in bodhi as well? And do you want to be notified about bugs filed

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

I don't have enough information for a proper bug report yet, but I observed the following: I installed firefox 57 from u-t yesterday on a freshly installed F27 box, and hooked it up to my sync account. On a second machine, I have firefox-56.0-2.fc26.x86_64. After setting up sync on the new

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On 10/12/2017 10:52 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:57:20AM +0200, Martin Stransky wrote: - and disabled XUL extensions For people who don't follow the internals of how Firefox works, this means all extensions you have installed will stop working. Apparently there is

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On 10/12/2017 09:57 AM, Martin Stransky wrote: Hi folks, let's have some fun with upcoming Firefox 57 a.k.a Firefox Quantum. This is a major Firefox update with key - pleasant and unpleasant - changes: - fastest than ever with Rust, CSS Stylo, Sandbox... - new "Photon" look - and disabled

Re: Call for testing - Firefox 57

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:57:20AM +0200, Martin Stransky wrote: > - and disabled XUL extensions For people who don't follow the internals of how Firefox works, this means all extensions you have installed will stop working. Apparently there is preference "extensions.legacy.enabled" which should

Call for testing - Firefox 57

Hi folks, let's have some fun with upcoming Firefox 57 a.k.a Firefox Quantum. This is a major Firefox update with key - pleasant and unpleasant - changes: - fastest than ever with Rust, CSS Stylo, Sandbox... - new "Photon" look - and disabled XUL extensions according to the disruptive nature