Re: Removing Firefox Version Number

On 20/08/11 09:34, [email protected] wrote:
> On Aug 19, 9:53 pm, Asa Dotzler<[email protected]>  wrote:
>> panos wrote:
>>> On Aug 18, 8:52 am, Asa Dotzler<[email protected]>    wrote:
>>
>>>> This is one thing that I think several people in this discussion
>>>> are missing. There is only the latest version. There are no other
>>>> versions. You're either on the latest version or you're just about
>>>> to be updated to the latest version. Those are the two states in
>>>> the new development model.
>>
>>> Are you talking about the perception you wish to give to users or you
>>> actually mean that automatic updates will be enforced and the choice
>>> to disable them will be removed ?
>>
>> Panos, the choice to disable unprompted updates will never be removed.
>> You can be assured of that. It certainly won't happen as long as I'm
>> involved in Mozilla. But unprompted updates are the normal case now and
>> unprompted updates are and will be the experience for the overwhelming
>> majority of our users going forward.
>>
>> - A
>
> The way you're saying it seems like "prompted updates" is not a choice
> that you would like us to have. But one that is interfering with your
> plans and so you want to make it difficult for those that choose
> something that you're offering against your will.
>
> MS heavy handed approach is the main reason why Mozilla grew into such
> a fruitful tree. From your words, it seems that the Firefox tree has
> grown too much to be handled with nurturing hands and now needs a
> heavy hand to control it.
>
> Without a nurturing hand, the tree will still bear fruits but won't
> grow any bigger. So it is time to pick up the fruits and run, soon
> there won't be any left because the masses are coming.
>
> You're either right about:biting the hands of those who have been
> watering the tree all along, or you're wrong and just not capable of
> keeping it nurtured.
>
> But in this sick world we live in, you could also be right by doing
> the tree wrong, if you are a virus trojaned by a competitor.
>
> Freedom of choice is what the thinking man wants. Freedom from choice
> is what the lazy masses want. You don't need to alienate one to serve
> the other. But you have to understand both.

He said (I'm paraphrasing in the hope of making it clearer) that he'll 
never allow users' ability to disable unprompted updates to be taken 
away from them; IOW, as long as he has a say, users will always be able 
to prevent auto-updates. So he's with you there (IIUC).

It's true he didn't say where that ability is to be found, so I did some 
detective work (Asa, please correct me if I'm wrong). The capability 
applies to all three of Firefox, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey. Some browser 
versions may have a checkbox somewhere for this (probably under 
"Advanced" Options), but IIUC that choice is governed by two 
about:config preferences: app.update.auto and app.update.enabled

For details, see:
	http://kb.mozillazine.org/App.update.auto
	http://kb.mozillazine.org/App.update.enabled

In short, the meanings are as follows:

	enabled=true	auto=true	(default)
		update automatically without asking

	enabled=true	auto=false
		check automatically; if found, ask user

	enabled=false	(auto=any)
		do not check automatically


Best regards,
Tony.
-- 
When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the plane, the
plane will fly.
		-- Donald Douglas