Rapid Release Follow-Up

October 3rd, 2011

Rapid Release

My recent post on the rapid release cycle generated a lot of response, some very thoughtful and some also very frustrated. Many of the comments focus on a few key issues listed below. We’ve been working on how to address these issues; I’ll outline our progress and plans here.

large deployments that certify software before permitting use can’t manage a 6 week cycle
add-on compability issues
update notices and fatigue
frustration that we didn’t get these things addressed better before making the change.

1. Large Deployments. We’ve made a proposal for extended support for large deployments.This proposal is under discussion now in the relevant newsgroup and in our Enterprise Working Group. We are incorporating feedback and expect to come to closure on this proposal shortly.

2. Add-On Compatibility. There are a couple of related issues that have made add-on compatibility difficult. First, we have historically assumed that add-ons are incompatible until proven to be compatible. This is a very conservative assumption which creates work for all add-on developers and notifications to all add-on users. We’ve corrected this for the add-ons hosted by Mozilla. Work is underway to correct this for the remaining add-ons. Here is a more detailed explanation of the topic; feature planning details are also available.

3. Update Fatigue. In the past we have been very careful to make sure people know something is changing with their web browser before it changes. We did this to make sure people are aware and in control of what’s happening to their environment. Our position was to err on the side of user notification. Today people are telling us — loudly — that the notifications are irritating and that a silent update process is important. This work is underway. The first set of improvements should appear in the next Firefox release, with more improvements appearing in the next few months. Also, one main reason people are notified of updates is due to incompatible add-ons which will be addressed by the work on add-on compatibility. More details can be found in this blog post: http://www.brianbondy.com/blog/id/125/mozilla-firefox-and-silent-updates

4. Frustration. The comments also registered frustration that we didn’t get these issues better addressed before making the shift. The change was abrupt and we should do better in the future. We focused very effectively on making sure we could make the core engineering aspects of a rapid release process work. We focused well on being able to deliver user and developer benefits on a much faster pace — we’ve already brought major memory improvements to make browsing faster, Do Not Track to Firefox for Android, developer tools and HTML5 support. But we didn’t focus so effectively on making sure all aspects of the product and ecosystem were ready. We believe we have plans in place to alleviate the issues that resulted, with improvements rolling out in in the coming weeks.

Categories: Mozilla

88 comments for “Rapid Release Follow-Up”

1
Corp. IT said on October 3rd, 2011 at 3:11 pm:

Mitchell,

Thank you; this message is more important to me than the technical details. As you know, businesses are concerned not only with the product but with having a reliable partner. The earlier disjointed messages, some unprofessional, along with the lack of official Mozilla response to that situation (no clarification, no accountability, no clear strategy, etc. — if there was a response, it wasn’t well publicized) created some doubt. What you just wrote is the kind of communication we need.

Congratulations on winning the Tom’s Hardware review. It’s just one publication’s unscientific review and I don’t want to exaggerate its meaning, but it’s a sign that the rapid updates are paying off.

Corp. IT
2
J. McNair said on October 3rd, 2011 at 3:55 pm:

Well, it’s not an apology, but perhaps one doesn’t need to apologize for quality (why, hello there, Firefox 7). Thanks for the admission of responsibility, and for the clear descriptions of what your fine (though sometimes frustrating) organization will do to make things better for ALL users.
3
sysKin said on October 3rd, 2011 at 6:41 pm:

I think the part where mozilla representatives told community members to leave the community if they don’t agree with current approach (whatsmybrowserversion com) didn’t help either.
4
Mitchell said on October 3rd, 2011 at 9:33 pm:

Corp IP, J McNair, SysKin — As you note, there are also improvements in how we communicate that would help both people interested in Mozilla and those of us trying to make it work well. Another thing to work on.
5
davide ficano said on October 3rd, 2011 at 10:41 pm:

Honestly I’m tired to receive from my extensions’ users bug requests in the form “please update form Fx 7.x, 8.x”.

I host my extensions on AMO but also on my website, the problem occurs on my website and I can’t be reactive at every new Firefox release because I’m not a commercial developer but I would care for my users.

Please don’t tell me to use the AddonSDK because it isn’t (yet) productive like the XUL environment and converting complex existing extensions can be very hard, introducing regressions without significant benefits.

Developing for a platform must be a pleasure not a pain.

Please apologize me for the rant but I really love the Mozilla world, I totally agree with its manifesto, I believe into the motto “Make the web a safe and better place” but as volunteer developer the new release cycle is really really frustrating
6
Axel Hecht said on October 4th, 2011 at 4:06 am:

Davide, I recall someone mentioning that firebug got their problems around updates and local vs AMO served figured out. Mind poking the add-on community for a post on that?

Also, if you want to serve updates locally, Mike Kaply has a post on http://mike.kaply.com/2011/06/29/creating-a-universal-updateurl/ on how to serve them to be “compatible by default”.
7
skierpage said on October 4th, 2011 at 5:21 am:

While a vocal minority complained, Mozilla made three Firefox releases that reliably, rapidly, and regularly improved the browser. And judging from Nightly, so will the next two. I hope you’ll find that improving communication is an API-compatible documentation tweak by comparison 🙂

I think 2011.N would be a better version number, but I’m not complaining.
8
Jay said on October 4th, 2011 at 5:41 am:

I was aghast (pleasantly) when installing FF 8 beta for the first time when the new addons compatibility dialog appeared with check boxes for those addons that are compatibile and which ones are not as well as which ones I want to keep and make compatible. After making my choices the install proceeded and ALL of my previous addons worked as intended.
9
Ronald Hunter said on October 4th, 2011 at 6:00 am:

I certainly hope that no plan which includes silent updates will change the policy allowing users to require permission for any update. I REALLY hate this feature of Google Chrome.
Otherwise, I am 100% in favor of the changes. One thing, I think the update should take place when the program terminates, or when it next starts so that the annoying ‘an update is available’ doesn’t interrupt my work. And, of course, no update should occur when the program is in use.
10
Pingback from MOZILLA AIMS TO ADD SILENT UPDATING TO FIREFOX 10 » MOZILLA, FIREFOX, CHROME, WINDOWS, GREGG, STRONG » GADGETTECHNEWS.CO.CC

[…] &#959f th&#1077 Mozilla Foundation, Mitchell Baker, acknowledged wh&#1072t &#1109h&#1077 called “update fatigue.”“In th&#1077 past w&#1077 h&#1072&#957&#1077 b&#1077&#1077n extremely careful t&#959 […]
11
Pingback from Firefox Keeping Rapid Release, But Adding Silent Update Option For Irritated Users : Test Drive

[…] is changing with their web browser before it changes,” Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker said in a blog post yesterday. “ Our position was to err on the side of user notification. Today people are telling us […]
12
Sailfish said on October 4th, 2011 at 12:09 pm:

The “in-the-wild” add-on detector and authorization process should help as I’ve already seen it in action using 8b, 9a2 and 10a1. Also, while many extension add-ons continue to work from one release to the next, since the underlying architecture changes in the new release do not break the extensions code, this has not been the case with theme add-ons. In every release, there have been significant changes in terms of styles, yes, but also (new stylesheets, new/changed files and added/removed images. While a previous release theme may “appear” to visually work, in fact, in a number of cases, they are missing visual changes, some of them very important. Integrating these changes into a new theme takes a significant effort on the author’s part in that they have to do a careful review of each change to insure that they’ve properly accounted for it.

So, my recommendation would be to consider another approach to how 3rd party themes (3PT) are handled in up-releases. Before a previous release AMO-hosted 3PT version number is auto-incremented, a careful review of the new theme changes added since the last release should done to determine if it is wise for a 3PT to have its max-version number bumped by the AMO team and, if not, then ACR should also not allow the theme to be used on the next release.
13
Phillip M Jones, CET said on October 4th, 2011 at 3:47 pm:

Why not do away with the need for max version in extensions.That seems to be the biggest stumbling block for majority of extension addons.

Also in my case I’ve noticed some of my Internet plugins (not extension) have been made non working on versions past 3.6.x FF (and 2.0.x on SeaMonkey) due to the changes. You changes should not affect Plugins because they are unrelated.
14
Franadora said on October 4th, 2011 at 4:26 pm:

Will the automatic updating require administrative permissions? On XP I am usually in a user account with limited permissions. From once a week to once a month, I log in to an account with Administrator permissions to perform maintenance. I noticed that the recent upgrade to FF7 (and FF7.01) only occurred when I logged in as administrator. Other than XP, I’m not sure what other OS’s are affected. It is currently possible that I could surf for almost a month with an insecure browser.

Very early version of Firefox (or Firebird or Phoenix?) included a change to the throbber if an update was available. Perhaps that should be brought back?
15
Pingback from Mozilla aims to add silent updating to Firefox 10 | National Cyber Security

[…] Mozilla did not say it was copying Chrome — it’s denied doing so with other features — but the chairman of the Mozilla Foundation, Mitchell Baker, acknowledged what she called “update fatigue.” […]
16
Pingback from Links 4/10/2011: Parted Magic 6.7, Red Hat’s Latest Takeover, Fedora 16 Beta | Techrights

[…] Rapid Release Follow-Up My recent post on the rapid release cycle generated a lot of response, some very thoughtful and some also very frustrated. Many of the comments focus on a few key issues listed below. We’ve been working on how to address these issues; I’ll outline our progress and plans here. […]
17
P. Smith said on October 4th, 2011 at 5:59 pm:

Seems like the development of main product (Firefox) in MoFo is quite chaotic. No one thinks of consequences at first step of any new change.
You had to prepare the “ecosystem” for the rapid release cycle BEFORE you actually switched to it.
That is a fail, and actually it is just one of many.
While Mozilla remains deaf to users’ voice it will regress more and more.
My opinion is that Mozilla now is in the crisis. The reason of that crisis is a bad management model. I don’t mean personally you, but I could mention creative lead Aza Raskin, who’s destructive decisions don’t find users’ approval.
Please, Mozilla, here my roar.
18
Pingback from Mozilla aims to add silent updating to Firefox 10 | lubuklinggau.org

[…] Mozilla did not contend it was duplicating Chrome — it’s denied doing so with other facilities — though a authority of a Mozilla Foundation, Mitchell Baker, concurred what she called “update fatigue.” […]
19
sup said on October 4th, 2011 at 7:01 pm:

Version 7 is on Rapid Release. 6 on LTS.
After X months, 7 becomes LTS, 8 on RR.

Simple. Why not?

I get to use LTS, and don’t have to constantly monitor changes.
New features – configure (WebGL etc.).
Removed features – compensate (Stylish, if it’s working..).
Broken addons. Simply bumping max version doesn’t make me feel at ease. I would prefer to know author tested it. Specially a security related addon, like Perspectives.

I don’t want Firefox to be a chore. I don’t want to constantly attend to it. I want to use it.

I don’t want RR, and i’m not an enterprise. I just want a stable browser. Stable in my sense, to be clear and not invite an argument, not in any other.
If anyone would use RR, i’m fine with that. Give me an LTS, preferably as i described above.

A frustrated, loyal Firefox user.
20
sup said on October 4th, 2011 at 7:08 pm:

I forgot to add, omiting the changes is also not what i want. I do want to know what’s new.
The reason I and probably others hate to see them often is because of the rapid release thing. I just don’t want the changes to be often.

Maybe others really said they hate just the notifications, i can only say that’s not me.

Personally, my “irritation” over the notifications are a symptom, not a cause.
But I can only speak for myself.

Good luck Mozilla.
21
Alice said on October 4th, 2011 at 9:25 pm:

Update Fatigue? too bad.

because my addon not work , so i use Firefox 3.6.
22
Pingback from Nowinki Informatyczne » Blog Archive » Mozilla wprowadzi ciche aktualizacje w Firefoksie 10 » Nowinki Informatyczne

[…] Baker, prezes Mozilla Foundation napisała, że kiedyś jej firma starała się dokładnie informować użytkowników o zmianach w […]
23
Pingback from Mozilla might do silent updating to Firefox 10 browser

[…] Mozilla did not say it was copying Chrome — it’s denied doing so with other features — but the chairman of the Mozilla Foundation, Mitchell Baker, acknowledged what she called “update fatigue.” […]
24
Pingback from 1081009 | Firefox เตรียมแก้ปัญหาเรื่องความเข้ากันได้ของส่วนเสริม-วิธีการอัพเดต | ร้อยแปดพันเก้า.com

[…] ที่มา – Mozilla Future Releases, Lizard Wrangling […]
25
Pingback from Las actualizaciones silenciosas vendrán de la mano de Firefox 10 - Taringa!

[…] | Mozilla Wiki, Mitchell Baker En Genbeta | La pregunta de la semana: ¿Cuál es el futuro del navegador Mozilla […]
26
Pingback from Las actualizaciones silenciosas vendrán de la mano de Firefox 10 | Geeks21.com - Tecnología, Entretenimiento y Cultura

[…] | Mozilla Wiki, Mitchell Baker En Genbeta | La pregunta de la semana: ¿Cuál es el futuro del navegador Mozilla […]
27
Pingback from Las actualizaciones silenciosas vendrán de la mano de Firefox 10 - La Isla Buscada

[…] | Mozilla Wiki, Mitchell Baker En Genbeta | La pregunta de la semana: ¿Cuál es el futuro del navegador Mozilla […]
28
Pingback from Mozilla : des mises jour transparentes pour Firefox 10 | Allomonsite.com

[…] son blog personnel, Mitchell Baker, présidente la fondation, admet : « aujourd’hui les gens nous rise savoir – très clairement – que les […]
29
Pingback from Firefox will zurück zu stillen Updates, 6-Wochen-Release-Zyklus ermüdet Nutzer » t3n News

[…] muss Mozilla sich etwas überlegen. Den Entwicklern ist ebenso wie der Chefin klar, dass der kurze Releasezyklus Maßnahmen erfordert. Nutzer wollen sich nicht alle sechs Wochen […]
30
Pingback from Las actualizaciones silenciosas vendrán de la mano de Firefox 10 | EmaCorp News

[…] Vía | Mozilla Wiki, Mitchell Baker […]
31
Chris said on October 5th, 2011 at 4:05 pm:

In response to comment 14:

Will the automatic updating require administrative permissions? On XP I am usually in a user account with limited permissions. From once a week to once a month, I log in to an account with Administrator permissions to perform maintenance. I noticed that the recent upgrade to FF7 (and FF7.01) only occurred when I logged in as administrator. Other than XP, I’m not sure what other OS’s are affected. It is currently possible that I could surf for almost a month with an insecure browser.

Very early version of Firefox (or Firebird or Phoenix?) included a change to the throbber if an update was available. Perhaps that should be brought back?

*********************

Hi Franadora,

Thanks for your comment.

The current implementation plans for silent updates will not require admin accounts (across XP/Vista/7) to update to the latest and most secure version of Firefox.

Chris Lee
Firefox Product Manager
32
Pingback from Gebruikers Firefox ‘update moe’ | | Web & Coding.nlWeb & Coding.nl

[…] updaten introduceren. Beschikbare updates worden dan automatisch gedownload en geïnstalleerd. Volgens Mozilla voorzitter Mitchell Baker zijn veel gebruikers “update […]
33
Pingback from Mozilla coaxing old-era Firefox 3.6 users to upgrade | Christian Media Cross

[…] Monday, Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker said in a blog post that other rapid-release course corrections are on the way, including a more silent upgrade process […]
34
Pingback from Mozilla coaxing old-era Firefox 3.6 users to upgrade | Up2dateNews

[…] Monday, Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker said in a blog post that other rapid-release course corrections are on the way, including a more silent upgrade process […]
35
Pingback from Mozilla coaxing old-era Firefox 3.6 users to upgrade

[…] Monday, Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker said in a blog post that other rapid-release course corrections are on the way, including a more silent upgrade process […]
36
Mike said on October 6th, 2011 at 11:29 am:

In the past, news of support for silent updates would not significantly concern me for I felt I could reasonably count on:

a) Admins/users would insist on and maintain control over the update process so that computers within their network would only be updated after said updates were deemed safe, compatible, and appropriate.

b) Software developers would insist on and continue to maintain support for fine grained admin/user *control* over the updating process so that those who use their software could maintain safe computing practices.

However, it appears to me that more and more inexperienced admins carelessly allow software to pull updates into their corporate environment without so much as a sanity check of what changes are being made and when. Even worse, it appears to me that more and more inexperienced software developers feel it is appropriate for them to reduce admin/user control over the update process and the distinctly different steps of checking for an update to see what is available, downloading an update, and applying the update. Having seen some foolish and inappropriate changes to the Mozilla update mechanism(s), I’m concerned there will be more which further degrades admin/user control over their systems. It is about control, after all… not simply notification.
37
Pingback from Mozilla idzie w ślady Google… będzie bezpieczniej, czy tylko wygodniej? « Spider's Web

[…] Mozilla obawia się, że dla części z nich może to być problem (Mitchell Baker, szefowa FM, mówi wprost, że boi się “zmęczenia […]
38
Pingback from Mozilla coaxing old-era Firefox 3.6 users to upgrade | Partners In Sublime

[…] Monday, Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker said in a blog post that other rapid-release course corrections are on the way, including a more silent upgrade process […]
39
Pingback from Mozilla coaxing old-era Firefox 3.6 users to upgrade | Myfriendpal

[…] Monday, Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker said in a blog post that other rapid-release course corrections are on the way, including a more silent upgrade process […]
40
Pingback from Mozilla implementará actualizaciones silenciosas en Firefox

[…] información: Blog de Mitchell Baker (Mozilla Foundation) Tags: actualizaciones, Firefox, […]
41
Gary said on October 7th, 2011 at 10:40 am:

Why not take a page from Microsoft and let the user decide if they want the automatic (silent) update or if they want to be notified and install the update at a later time?
42
Jesse Bees said on October 7th, 2011 at 11:01 am:

Re: comment 31

The current implementation plans for silent updates will not require admin accounts (across XP/Vista/7) to update to the latest and most secure version of Firefox.

Chris Lee
Firefox Product Manager

—————————-

What a shame. This is the primary reason I can’t bring myself to use Chrome. I have to suppose that Firefox will get around admin privileges the same way that Chrome does: by installing itself in a “data” directory rather than one designated by the OS for programs.
43
Pingback from Mozilla Plans to Silently Update Future Firefox Releases | wpgrabber

[…] new silent update policy, which Mitchell Baker, Chair of the Mozilla Foundation, announced via her blog, will not take effect until Firefox 10 which will arrive in early […]
44
Pingback from Mozilla Plans to Silently Update Future Firefox Releases « News Hub Today

[…] new silent update policy, which Mitchell Baker, Chair of the Mozilla Foundation, announced via her blog, will not take effect until Firefox 10 which will arrive in early […]
45
Rich Smith said on October 7th, 2011 at 11:21 am:

Great, now I’m going to have to blackhole mozilla.org at my router and then manually open up a route every time I’m ready to update. Why is it so hard to figure out that the people who want Chrome will use chrome, not wait for Firefox to imitate it sufficiently?
46
Rich Smith said on October 7th, 2011 at 11:24 am:

RE: COMMENT 42

> Why not take a page from Microsoft and let the user decide if they want the
> automatic (silent) update or if they want to be notified and install the update
> at a later time?

Because you are not the demographic mozilla.org is aiming for. They have made the corporate decision to abandon the able users in favor of the inexperienced masses. When the able users start switching their friends’ and family’s browsers to something else that treats them with a little more respect, perhaps mozilla.org will start copying that browser.
47
Pingback from Mozilla coaxing old-era Firefox 3.6 users to upgrade | Social Media and Tech Tips - Cuhea - Your Social Media Guide

[…] Monday, Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker said in a blog post that other rapid-release course corrections are on the way, including a more silent upgrade process […]
48
Pingback from Web Development articles, tutorials, help » Blog Archive » Mozilla Plans to Silently Update Future Firefox Releases

[…] new silent update policy, which Mitchell Baker, Chair of the Mozilla Foundation, announced via her blog, will not take effect until Firefox 10, which will arrive in early […]
49
Pingback from Mozilla Plans to Silently Update Future Firefox Releases | t3knoDorKs

[…] new wordless refurbish policy, that Mitchell Baker, Chair of a Mozilla Foundation, announced around her blog, will not take outcome until Firefox 10, that will arrive in early […]
50
Pingback from Mozilla aims to add silent updating to Firefox 10 « Browsers « { DEV }

[…] Mozilla did not say it was copying Chrome — it’s denied doing so with other features — but the chairman of the Mozilla Foundation, Mitchell Baker, acknowledged what she called “update fatigue.” […]