When will the unbranded versions of Firefox be out?

[kjemmo]

Simple question, that i have not been able to find an answer to.

I know that it has been announced that the unbranded versions of Firefox will be out with version 42. The version where installing un-signed add-ons will be impossible.

I wonder if the unbranded versions will be out sooner.

I provide a professional un-listed add-on to a limited user group. I need a much faster and smoother release flow than the new signing system can provide. Therefor I will need to ask my users to use the unbranded version of Firefox. Some transition time would be great so my users can set up the the unbranded version and move there settings and profiles before version 42 arrives and they all of a sudden wont be able to use my add-on with that version.

So do anyone know when the first unbranded version without signed add-on limitations will be available?

[johnp_]

There's been a post on the firefox-dev list a couple days ago:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... cEg1Ns0yLw

tl;dr: 42 won't disable unsigned add-ons. signing enforcement is delayed until version 44, 43 will have about:config switch (Bug 1203584)

fwiw, the signing system can provide a quite fast release flow once your add-on has been reviewed and if you don't revamp your whole add-on with every new version.

[kjemmo]

There's been a post on the firefox-dev list a couple days ago:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... cEg1Ns0yLw

tl;dr: 42 won't disable unsigned add-ons. signing enforcement is delayed until version 44, 43 will have about:config switch (Bug 1203584)

Thanks for this new information. It takes a bit of the current pressure away. Yet my questions is still unanswered. I would like to know when the unsigned versions will be available. Hopefully there will be some transition time, so 'twin' unbranded versions are available along with branded versions before signing enforcement kicks in with version 44. I would like to see unbranded versions from version 42 and 43 at the latest in order to do all needed testing and guide users who need to switch to an unbranded version.

fwiw, the signing system can provide a quite fast release flow once your add-on has been reviewed and if you don't revamp your whole add-on with every new version.

My code needs manual review because there are warnings, and there are currently only two persons who review unlisted add-ons. If it is weekend, holidays or if they have the flue, then the review can take days. My add-on is commercial remember, so just hours of downtime will make customers annoyed and unleash many angry emails.

[kjemmo]

Sorry to bump this question.

Is there really no one who knows when the unbranded versions of Firefox will be out?

Or do anyone know if it is yet to be decided?

[WaltS48]

Most likely when Firefox 44 Beta is released. Maybe.

Firefox 44: Release and Beta versions of Firefox will not allow unsigned extensions to be installed, with no override.

and

They will be available in the en-US locale only.

Addons/Extension Signing - MozillaWiki

I don't see a need before that.

[lithopsian]

The need is to get rid of the warnings, for addons that are never going to be signed, and to make sure everything works while there is still a chance to fix it.

[kjemmo]

Most likely when Firefox 44 Beta is released. Maybe.

Firefox 44: Release and Beta versions of Firefox will not allow unsigned extensions to be installed, with no override.

and

They will be available in the en-US locale only.

Addons/Extension Signing - MozillaWiki

Thanks for this information. Still it is not really certain.

I don't see a need before that.

Well, there is plenty of need for just some transition time. If the unbranden versions are not available before version 44 where signing enforcement kicks in then there is no transition time at all. No time to backup and move extensions that can not be signed to an unbranded version. One morning when when Firefox updates to to version 44 all unsigned extension will stop to work. And only on this very day are you offered an alternative that can run the unsigned extension that you rely on in your everyday work. That insures 100% that there will be no testing possible and no time at all to setup an unbranded alternative before hand.

Remember that not all unsigned extensions are spammers, add injectors and homepage hijackers. I provide a professional extension that my users rely on. The only reason that I am not getting it signed is that I can not live with the prolonged release flows. My code will trigger warnings, so a manual review will be needed for every release. I can not wait for this as my users wont accept more than a few hours wait when a bug needs fixing.

I can not imagine that I am the only one with this concern.

I have supported Mozilla (also as a sponsor) for years but now i feel like honest extension developers who for some reason can't or won't have there extensions signed are treated like dishonest hackers. I have been in contact with the AMO admins but the conversation stopped as soon as I raised these concerns. Really? You just don't get a reply if you consider to not have your extension signed?

Well. If anyone with any influence see this, then please consider at least some transition time where where users of unsigned extensions can switch to an unbranded version. There really is real need for that.

[patrickjdempsey]

Supposedly they were going to work on another solution for corporate environments where neither signing or switching to unbranded builds was an adequate solution... but I've heard absolutely nothing about that. Either it's a secret or they were simply lying about their intentions.

[lithopsian]

Supposedly they were going to work on another solution for corporate environments where neither signing or switching to unbranded builds was an adequate solution... but I've heard absolutely nothing about that. Either it's a secret or they were simply lying about their intentions.

They've waiting for inspiration to strike

[kjemmo]

Hey everybody. Easy now .

Let us stick to the original question:

When will the unbranded versions of Firefox be out?

Can anyone confirm that it will be with version 44?

And if that can be confirmed I would like to hear comments to my concerns on transition time.

[patrickjdempsey]

Considering that not long ago it was supposed to be version 42... as with everything Mozilla does: if it happens you'll know it when it's released. No one here can even for sure guarantee that they will do it.

[malliz]

Nobody here can confirm anything because we just do not know. I seriously doubt if the devs know because that would mean they actually have a plan

[the-edmeister]

Hey everybody. Easy now .

Let us stick to the original question:

When will the unbranded versions of Firefox be out?

Where have you seen it mentioned that Mozilla would be doing their own "unbranded" version?
Seeing that Aurora / DE and Nightly won't have that restriction, I fail to see the need for a 5th "channel" from Mozilla.

I would expect the unbranded version to come from a 3rd party or a "build switch" provided to allow users to create their own build sans the code that provides the signing restrictions.

[WaltS48]

I saw it mentioned in the FAQ of Addons/Extension Signing - MozillaWiki

What are my options if I want to install unsigned extensions in Firefox?
The Developer Edition and Nightly versions of Firefox will have a setting to disable signature enforcement. There will also be special unbranded versions of Release and Beta that will have this setting, so that add-on developers can work on their add-ons without having to sign every build. To disable signature checks, you will need to set the xpinstall.signatures.required preference to "false".
type about:config into the URL bar in Firefox
in the Search box type xpinstall.signatures.required
double-click the preference, or right-click and selected "Toggle", to set it to false.

How will the unbranded versions of Firefox work?
They will work just like Firefox, with two differences: they will have a setting to disable mandatory signature checks, and they will not have the Firefox name and logo (instead using a generic name and logo). They will be available in the en-US locale only.

Sounds to me like Mozilla is building the unbranded versions for developers.

I'll go on record as saying I hope they are not available to regular users, but don't know how that would be accomplished.

[patrickjdempsey]

Where have you seen it mentioned that Mozilla would be doing their own "unbranded" version?

Mozilla. It's the *only* way for developers to actually build extensions. You can't build and test extensions in Nightly or "Developer"/Aurora because the code may not match Release.