Firefox 3.5 EOL Plan

87 views
Skip to first unread message

Christian Legnitto

unread,
May 11, 2011, 6:48:40 PM5/11/11
to mozilla.dev.planning group
Summary
------------------------------
* Current working Firefox 3.5 EOL plan can be found @ https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/3.5_EOL

* We have no intention to release another 3.5 update (but if we need a chemspill before the plan is implemented we will discuss it)

* We have a plan with investigation work and a backup plan if the investigation says our desired plan is unworkable

* For both plans the end result is sending 3.6 as a minor update for 3.5 users...the difference is merely the implementation method and timetable

* No real actions need to take place until June, so there aren't pressing requirements that could impact the new release process

* Firefox 3.6 has different considerations and a draft plan will be sent around in due time


Details
------------------------------

There has been a of discussion about 3.5 EOL and we have a plan (already being implemented) documented @ https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/3.5_EOL. The plan was created with input from the security team, QA, product, and RelEng.

You can read the wiki for the specifics but the main takeaways are:

1. We want to do this quickly
2. We want users to self-select into running Firefox 4 if at all possible (dangle the carrot)
3. We don't think self-selection will ultimately get us to the place we need to be
4. We will force 3.6 on 3.5 stragglers not choosing to update to Firefox 4 or 3.6 (give them the stick)
5. We feel comfortable making the major update choice for users because a) the versions are very similar and b) we'd rather lose a small amount of miffed users than leave a large amount of users vulnerable

As I mentioned in the summary, we intend to ship Firefox 3.6.18 (the update shipping at the same time as Firefox 5) to 3.5 users when it is released. This is highly dependent on the outcome ofhttps://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=650030. If the bug is not resolved in a timely manner we will instead do an advertised prompt to Firefox 5, let it sink in, and then update users to 3.6.18 via automatic update.

RelEng is working on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=650030 but other than the Google homepage snippets (already in progress) there is no other work to be done until June.

If there are major issues with this plan please do speak up, but I believe it has been vetted enough to put into action.

Thanks,
Christian

David E. Ross

unread,
May 11, 2011, 7:04:55 PM5/11/11
to

You state:


> We will force 3.6 on 3.5 stragglers not choosing to update to Firefox 4 or 3.6

Will you indeed FORCE an update on users who have set their preferences
to disable automatic updates?

--

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

On occasion, I might filter and ignore all newsgroup messages
posted through GoogleGroups via Google's G2/1.0 user agent
because of spam from that source.

Christian Legnitto

unread,
May 11, 2011, 7:20:33 PM5/11/11
to David E. Ross, dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org

No, sorry. That was a bad choice of words and has been gone over in a different thread in a similar context. For those that still have automatic updates enabled we will give them 3.6. If they explicitly uncheck automatic updates we will not send an update...we honor the pref.

The "forcing" was referring to the fact that these 3.5 stragglers (with automatic updates turned on) have been shown multiple in-product popups urging them to update to Firefox 3.6, a popup urging them to update to 4.0, first run pages teslling them to go to mozilla.com and get a newer version, etc. So far, they have not taken the updates for whatever reasons.

We are treating the automatic update checkbox enabled as a "yes, I want mozilla to keep me updated". Previously as a courtesy we had people opt-in between major versions due to the potential jarring nature of the update. We feel the difference between 3.5 and 3.6 is not severe and with 3.5 reaching end-of-life 3.6 *is* the security update for 3.5 users. Of course, we prefer people voluntarily install Firefox 4, but at a minimum we want them on a release that is getting active security updates.

Thanks,
Christian

Brandon Sterne

unread,
May 11, 2011, 7:47:12 PM5/11/11
to Christian Legnitto, dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org, David E. Ross
On 05/11/2011 04:20 PM, Christian Legnitto wrote:
> On May 11, 2011, at 4:04 PM, David E. Ross wrote:
> No, sorry. That was a bad choice of words and has been gone over in a different thread in a similar context. For those that still have automatic updates enabled we will give them 3.6. If they explicitly uncheck automatic updates we will not send an update...we honor the pref.

Don't apologize. That different thread in a similar context was spun up
by David as well. This was already addressed by Rob Strong (see below)
and others. Move along, nothing to see here.

-Brandon


On 04/22/2011 11:50 AM, Robert Strong wrote:
> On 4/22/2011 11:27 AM, David E. Ross wrote:
>> Any update forced upon me when I have set my preferences to prohibit
>> such updates will result in a criminal complaint under U.S. law. There
>> are federal laws against unwelcome tampering with someone else's
>> computer.
>>
>> You can let me know about updates and offer them to me. But the law
>> requires that you allow me the option to decide whether or not to accept
>> such updates.
>
> There is no such ability to force a user that has explicitly set updates
> to always prompt. As a matter of fact, we always prompt for major
> updates even if the user has selected to just download and apply the
> update prior to Firefox 4. As of Firefox 4 the Firefox drivers can
> choose to actually respect this preference for both major and minor
> updates. This way if the product drivers believe the user needs to
> consent prior to downloading and applying an update they can. To be
> abundantly clear... what you are concerned about is not possible.
>
> btw: keep in mind that the terms major and minor are just metadata and
> are used by the client prior to Firefox 4 to force prompting for major
> updates.
>
> Robert

David E. Ross

unread,
May 11, 2011, 11:19:21 PM5/11/11
to
On 5/11/11 4:47 PM, Brandon Sterne wrote:
> On 05/11/2011 04:20 PM, Christian Legnitto wrote:
>> On May 11, 2011, at 4:04 PM, David E. Ross wrote:
>>> On 5/11/11 3:48 PM, Christian Legnitto wrote:
>>>
>>> You state:
>>>> We will force 3.6 on 3.5 stragglers not choosing to update to Firefox 4 or 3.6
>>>
>>> Will you indeed FORCE an update on users who have set their preferences
>>> to disable automatic updates?
>>
>> No, sorry. That was a bad choice of words and has been gone over in a different thread in a similar context. For those that still have automatic updates enabled we will give them 3.6. If they explicitly uncheck automatic updates we will not send an update...we honor the pref.
>
> Don't apologize. That different thread in a similar context was spun up
> by David as well. This was already addressed by Rob Strong (see below)
> and others. Move along, nothing to see here.
>

I'm not sure what you meant by "spun up". I thought the issue was quite
well resolved in the prior thread that you cited. When I again see
"forced" without any qualification, however, I wondered if perhaps the
approach had changed. Furthermore, I was not the only one who had
problems with "mandatory" in that prior thread.

Christian Legnitto was correct to clarify the approach. And yes, the
word "force" was perhaps not the correct word. You, however, added
nothing beneficial to the discussion.

Mike Shaver

unread,
May 11, 2011, 11:22:59 PM5/11/11
to Brandon Sterne, dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org, Christian Legnitto
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Brandon Sterne <bst...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Don't apologize.  That different thread in a similar context was spun up
> by David as well.  This was already addressed by Rob Strong (see below)
> and others.  Move along, nothing to see here.

Too bad, I was sort of interested to see the details of the

>>> criminal complaint under U.S. law.

Mike

Henri Sivonen

unread,
May 12, 2011, 3:35:35 AM5/12/11
to mozilla.dev.planning group
On May 12, 2011, at 02:20, Christian Legnitto wrote:

> No, sorry. That was a bad choice of words and has been gone over in a different thread in a similar context. For those that still have automatic updates enabled we will give them 3.6. If they explicitly uncheck automatic updates we will not send an update...we honor the pref.

What happens to users who have extensions that aren't compatible with 3.6?

> Of course, we prefer people voluntarily install Firefox 4, but at a minimum we want them on a release that is getting active security updates.

I'm curious: Has any consideration been given to making an unprompted laggard upgrade to Firefox 4 that keeps all the old toolbar settings that are still possible configurations: tabs not on top, Firefox button not enabled, etc. (at Firefox 3.6 EOL)?

--
Henri Sivonen
hsiv...@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/


Asa Dotzler

unread,
May 12, 2011, 4:56:38 AM5/12/11
to
On 5/12/2011 12:35 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:


> I'm curious: Has any consideration been given to making an unprompted laggard upgrade to Firefox 4 that keeps all the old toolbar settings that are still possible configurations: tabs not on top, Firefox button not enabled, etc. (at Firefox 3.6 EOL)?

Several of us have talked about this. I'm not sure what the work
entailed would be, and I'm not even sure it's a good idea, but the good
news is that we have a bit longer to think about the 3.6 -> Firefox
4/5/6 mandatory update.

- A

Robert Kaiser

unread,
May 12, 2011, 7:56:59 AM5/12/11
to
David E. Ross schrieb:

> I'm not sure what you meant by "spun up". I thought the issue was quite
> well resolved in the prior thread that you cited. When I again see
> "forced" without any qualification, however, I wondered if perhaps the
> approach had changed.

Please just accept that we _always_ mean "forced" or "mandatory" in
terms of updates to apply only to people who have automatic updates of
the product enabled. This is true now and in the future, so just take
that for granted. I hope that solves the problem once and for all.

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! :)

Ron Hunter

unread,
May 12, 2011, 5:39:11 PM5/12/11
to
And package Status-4-Evar with it.

Ron Hunter

unread,
May 12, 2011, 5:40:13 PM5/12/11
to
Judging by the number of comments from users who really hate the looks
of the FF4 UI, I think it would much less traumatic for them.

Robert Strong

unread,
May 12, 2011, 6:18:26 PM5/12/11
to dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org
On 5/12/2011 12:35 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On May 12, 2011, at 02:20, Christian Legnitto wrote:
>
>> No, sorry. That was a bad choice of words and has been gone over in a different thread in a similar context. For those that still have automatic updates enabled we will give them 3.6. If they explicitly uncheck automatic updates we will not send an update...we honor the pref.
> What happens to users who have extensions that aren't compatible with 3.6?
At present with the default settings the user will be prompted to update
if they have extensions that are enabled and compatible with the version
they are running. They will also be shown a list of the extensions that
are incompatible. This can be bypassed by changing an attribute for the
advertised update but at present I don't think we are planning on doing
that.

Robert

Christian Legnitto

unread,
May 12, 2011, 8:03:45 PM5/12/11
to Ron Hunter, dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org
Let's stay on topic...this thread is only about 3.5 users getting 3.6, NOT what to do with 3.6.

> _______________________________________________
> dev-planning mailing list
> dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-planning

Daniel Veditz

unread,
May 13, 2011, 7:18:32 PM5/13/11
to Henri Sivonen, mozilla.dev.planning group
On 5/12/11 12:35 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> What happens to users who have extensions that aren't compatible
> with 3.6?

The vast majority of 3.5-compatible addons are also 3.6-compatible
so we don't expect to hear too many complaints. For users who are in
that state the usual dialogs/prompts will happen.

> I'm curious: Has any consideration been given to making an
> unprompted laggard upgrade to Firefox 4 that keeps all the old
> toolbar settings that are still possible configurations: tabs not
> on top, Firefox button not enabled, etc. (at Firefox 3.6 EOL)?

Not seriously, but it's been suggested. It's premature to say the UI
changes will be why people will have stuck with 3.6 that long,
although anecdotally it is a high-volume complaint we're hearing in
the present.

-Dan Veditz

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages