On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:41 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 9 Sep 2014 at 15:23:35, Eduard Moraru > ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: > >> +1 for Thomas' logic. If its own maker dropped support for it, there is no >> logic in us supporting it. "simple and easy to defend”. > > -1 because: > > A) it’s very difficult to know which support you’re talking about (see below > for examples of the 4 dates for IE6.0.x) > B) it has never worked like this and never will… It all depends on our use > base and what they are using... > C) Based on your rule we should still support IE6 SP3 since it’s still > supported by MS on Windows Server 2003! (see below)
You should reread what I suggested: "only the most current version of Internet Explorer available for a supported operating system". So based on what's on http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle. So no we would not have to support IE6, we would actually drop IE8 and 9. > D) Based on your rule we wouldn’t be able to stop supporting IE8 now if we > wanted since it’s still supported on all windows versions except XP > > More elaborate answer for point B): > > You seem to forget for how long we’ve kept support for IE6 even though it > wasn’t supported anymore… If 90% of users are using a not supported browser, > I say we should still support it. Another good example is windows XP which > has been widely successful long after its successors were released because it > was just better in several domains... > > FTR (source: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_6#Release_history): > - Support for IE6.0 ended September 30, 2004 > - Support for IE6.0 SP1 ended October 10, 2006 > - Support for IE6.0 SP2 ended July 13, 2010 > - Support for IE6.0 SP3 ended on April 8, 2014. However it’s still supported > till July 14, 2015 for Windows Server 2003. > > So I prefer my proposal which is simply to collectively decide when we wish > to drop support for a given version (for example I’m probably going to send > soon a mail to propose dropping IE8 support for the 7.x cycle). > > Thanks > -Vincent > >> Thanks, >> Eduard >> >> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) > > wrote: >> >> > My vote goes to: >> > +1 to support IE11(IE10) for Flamingo >> > -1 to support IE8 for Flamingo >> > +1 to support IE8 for Colibri >> > >> > My rationale: >> > - Flamingo should be viewed as a modern skin and should be displayed on >> > modern browsers. >> > - Although Bootstrap states that it support IE8/IE9 (see >> > http://getbootstrap.com/getting-started/#support-ie8-ie9 ) the support is >> > partial. Some properties are not fully supported and also you need a >> > third-party JS dependency. >> > - We will dedicate development time to fix issues on a browser that will >> > die soon (and as you said is not supported by Microsoft and I don't even >> > mention other companies) >> > - IE8 works with Flamingo, but is not perfect (for me supporting a browser >> > means assuring all the functionality is working and displaying perfectly on >> > it). If an user really needs a perfect skin to work with IE8 they should >> > pick Colibri >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Caty >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Thomas Mortagne > > > >> > wrote: >> > >> > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Thomas Mortagne >> > > wrote: >> > > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Thomas Mortagne >> > > > wrote: >> > > >> Ok let me rephrase that a bit, what I would like to apply is what MS >> > > >> plan to upgrade: "only the most current version of Internet Explorer >> > > > >> > > > s/upgrade/apply/ >> > > > >> > > >> available for a supported operating system". So based on what's on >> > > >> http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle. >> > > >> > > Right now this mean dropping support for 8 and 9. >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Thomas Mortagne >> > > >> wrote: >> > > >>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:45 PM, [email protected] < >> > [email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> On 4 Sep 2014 at 16:43:42, Thomas Mortagne ( >> > [email protected] >> > > (mailto:[email protected])) wrote: >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>> IMO we should modify >> > > >>>>> >> > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/BrowserSupportStrategy >> > > >>>>> with something like "we support what Microsoft support". It's >> > simple >> > > >>>>> and easy to defend IMO (why the hell would we do what Microsoft >> > does >> > > >>>>> not ?). >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> I don’t like this too much because there are various levels of >> > > support. General support and the companies take specific IE support for >> > > older versions. >> > > >>> >> > > >>> I'm talking about general support (what MS call "mainstream support" >> > > >>> on http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle) of course >> > > >>> since that's what we are talking about here. >> > > >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> And then I don’t necessarily agree to support old versions of IE >> > even >> > > if MS support them. For me it’s our choice to make. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> Thanks >> > > >>>> -Vincent >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau >> > > >>>>> wrote: >> > > >>>>> > +1 for IE9/10/11 >> > > >>>>> > +0 for IE8 (there is a lot of users but even Microsoft does not >> > > support it!) >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>> > 2014-09-04 16:11 GMT+02:00 Thomas Mortagne : >> > > >>>>> > >> > > >>>>> >> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Thomas Mortagne >> > > >>>>> >> wrote: >> > > >>>>> >> > What about supporting what Microsoft support ? That means not >> > > IE9/10/11 >> > > >>>>> >> only. >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > >>>>> >> Remove the "not" of course. >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > >>>>> >> > >> > > >>>>> >> > See >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > >> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2014/08/07/stay-up-to-date-with-internet-explorer.aspx >> > > >>>>> >> . >> > > >>>>> >> > >> > > >>>>> >> > IMO we should not do more that the own browser editor does. >> > > >>>>> >> > >> > > >>>>> >> > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:40 PM, [email protected] >> > > >>>>> >> wrote: >> > > >>>>> >> >> Reviving this thread since we need to decide and lots of >> > > committers >> > > >>>>> >> haven’t voted yet! >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> I’ve updated >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/BrowserSupportStrategy >> > with >> > > >>>>> >> recent market share. >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> Note that there are various other sources and they don’t seem >> > > to show >> > > >>>>> >> similar data: >> > > >>>>> >> >> - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers >> > > >>>>> >> >> - >> > > http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parts_de_march%C3%A9_des_navigateurs_web >> > > >>>>> >> >> - http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> However I think they all show that if we wish to support 80% >> > > of users >> > > >>>>> >> we have to support about the 10 top browsers used and AFAICS >> > this >> > > includes: >> > > >>>>> >> >> - IE8/9/10/11 >> > > >>>>> >> >> - FF latest >> > > >>>>> >> >> - Chrome latest >> > > >>>>> >> >> - Safari latest >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> It seems market shared for IE8/9 are still high. However IE10 >> > > is less >> > > >>>>> >> high (probably because those who upgraded to it quickly upgraded >> > > to IE11)? >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> So far we have the following votes: >> > > >>>>> >> >> - Andrea: +1 to support IE10/11 >> > > >>>>> >> >> - Vincent: +1 to support IE10/11 >> > > >>>>> >> >> - Marius: +1 to support IE11, +0 to support IE8/9/10 >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> Thanks >> > > >>>>> >> >> -Vincent >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> On 10 Jun 2014 at 09:08:43, [email protected] ( >> > > [email protected] >> > > >>>>> >> (mailto:[email protected])) wrote: >> > > >>>>> >> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> Hi Andrea/all, >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> On 10 Jun 2014 at 08:46:45, Andreea Popescu ( >> > > [email protected] >> > > >>>>> >> (mailto:[email protected])) wrote: >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > Hello all, >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > Following the "Start supporting IE10 and IE11" thread I’d >> > > like to >> > > >>>>> >> propose >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > to vote if we will support IE10 and IE11. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> FTR the thread in question is at >> > > >>>>> >> http://markmail.org/message/zjlbcfkl5cqnrwfk >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > The most important reasons for supporting these versions >> > > are: >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > - Internet Explorer 8 and Internet Explorer 9 are still >> > > widely used >> > > >>>>> >> by >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > users, but many of them are currently choosing to update >> > to >> > > IE10 and >> > > >>>>> >> IE11. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > - according to netmarketshare.com (Browsers -> Desktop >> > > Share by >> > > >>>>> >> Version) >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > from a total of 100%, IE10 is used by 6.85% users and IE11 >> > > by 16.61% >> > > >>>>> >> users. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > It’s true that IE10 is not as popular as the older >> > versions >> > > (IE8 - >> > > >>>>> >> 20.85% >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > and IE9 - 8.89%), but its usage percentage is still >> > > significant. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > >> > > >>>>> >> >>> > Here’s my +1. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> On the above-mentioned thread Marius had proposed to support >> > > only the >> > > >>>>> >> latest version of each browser, which is basically what we’re >> > > doing except >> > > >>>>> >> for IE. The rationale is that it takes time to support all >> > > browsers and the >> > > >>>>> >> community can only do so much. Companies offering paid services >> > > on top of >> > > >>>>> >> XWiki could support the other browser versions for their >> > > customers. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> While I understand that, my POV is a bit different: I’d like >> > > that we >> > > >>>>> >> support the top browsers/versions used by the majority of >> > people, >> > > because I >> > > >>>>> >> feel XWiki will be successful if the majority of people can use >> > > it without >> > > >>>>> >> problems. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> Looking at the graph at >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/BrowserSupportStrategy if >> > > >>>>> >> we were to support at least the top 6 browser/versions we would >> > > cover 70% >> > > >>>>> >> of the user base. For IE this means supporting IE8-11. Note that >> > > strangely >> > > >>>>> >> IE8 is the top browser in market shares, way above most of the >> > > others… Not >> > > >>>>> >> supporting it ATM would mean “loosing" 20%+ of users. If we have >> > > problems >> > > >>>>> >> supporting, say the top 10 browsers, then we can drop to top 6, >> > > if that’s >> > > >>>>> >> an issue, then to top 5, etc. ATM we’re supporting 5 browsers >> > and >> > > with >> > > >>>>> >> IE10-11, this would mean raising to 7 browsers. I propose that >> > we >> > > try it >> > > >>>>> >> with the additional 2 browsers (IE10-11) and see if it’s a >> > burden >> > > for us or >> > > >>>>> >> it’s manageable. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> So there are 2 questions in here: >> > > >>>>> >> >>> - Starting the support for IE10-11: I’m +1 for that >> > > >>>>> >> >>> - Deciding if we want to support only one version for each >> > > browser or >> > > >>>>> >> instead support the highest browsers in marketshare. I’m +1 for >> > > the >> > > >>>>> >> marketshare approach. >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >>> Thanks >> > > >>>>> >> >>> -Vincent >> > > >>>>> >> >>> >> > > >>>>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>> >> >> devs mailing list >> > > >>>>> >> >> [email protected] >> > > >>>>> >> >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > >>>>> >> > >> > > >>>>> >> > >> > > >>>>> >> > >> > > >>>>> >> > -- >> > > >>>>> >> > Thomas Mortagne >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > >>>>> >> -- >> > > >>>>> >> Thomas Mortagne >> > > >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>> >> devs mailing list >> > > >>>>> >> [email protected] >> > > >>>>> >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > >>>>> >> >> > > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>> > devs mailing list >> > > >>>>> > [email protected] >> > > >>>>> > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> -- >> > > >>>>> Thomas Mortagne >> > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>>> devs mailing list >> > > >>>>> [email protected] >> > > >>>>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ >> > > >>>> devs mailing list >> > > >>>> [email protected] >> > > >>>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> -- >> > > >>> Thomas Mortagne >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> -- >> > > >> Thomas Mortagne >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Thomas Mortagne >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Thomas Mortagne >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > devs mailing list >> > > [email protected] >> > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > devs mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
