On 11/17/2012 10:45 PM, Omega X wrote:
> On 11/16/2012 12:35 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
>> It's not really a question of whether they *can*. It's a question of
>> whether that is actually *helpful*. I'm saying that it's clear we're not
>> going to be shipping a release win64 build any time soon, with our
>> current focus on Metro and Firefox OS. Bugs that are win64-specific
>> aren't going to get any attention and are just going to frustrate
>> everyone, testers and developers alike.
>>
>> crash-stats is just a symptom of the problem.
>>
>> --BDS
>>
>
>
> This assumes that those 64-bit users have access to Windows 8 and
> FirefoxOS. This boils down to developer concern only.
It doesn't presume anything of the kind. It does assert that 32-bit
Firefox builds work for those users, and in many important cases work
better than 64-bit builds do.

For the purposes of this thread, it is already a done decision that we
aren't going to ship 64-bit Windows Firefox builds in the first half of
2013, and probably not at all in 2013. In the meantime, we aren't going
to fix crashes or plugin bugs that only affect 64-bit builds. Those
decisions have already been made. The only question to decide here is
whether the existing 64-bit Windows nightlies provide any value to the
project.

>
> Testers are already frustrated that many valid bugs regardless of 64
> or 32b-bit remain unfixed for extreme periods of time or indefinitely.
>
No large software is ever going to be able to fix all its issues. We
have limited resources and basically unlimited demands. That's why
module owners and release drivers prioritize which ones are the most
important and urgent, and we try to fix those. Bugs which affect win64
builds are inherently lower priority to the project.

--BDS