Discussion about official Mozilla Thunderbird builds
There is a know issue in TB 18.104.22.168 (source), which is fixed in TB 3 en TB 22.214.171.124pre.
A lot of people, who post in German Thunderbird support forum, (will) stay with TB 2 for a while.
TB 126.96.36.199 is five months oud.
I can't find any release planning ("TBD") for Tb 188.8.131.52
I am aware of the problematic to handle 4 branches (2.0.0.x, 3.0.x, 3.1, 3.2).
But what about the users, who want to stay with Tb 2.0.0.x till TB 3.1 is released?
When do they get the next security release of TB 2?
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla. ... d0dcb9f0f/
Through "handling" of Tb2 and .24(pre) on the part of MozillaMessaging, I am to go off!!!
A sort of this mess I knows only from Redmond and not from Mozilla. But, ok. Its not Mozilla. Its Mozilla Messaging...
Greetings to the Mozilla Community as this is my first post in this forum
I use products from Mozilla since the beginning - especially Thunderbird - and have to admit that this is the very first time I really start to get angry about the actions of the Mozilla Foundation in this case, especially the people at Mozilla Messaging!
After reading certain threads about the topic one gets the impression that the people at Mozilla Messaging lost their eyes for the important things in simply wanting too much too soon. You simply cannot release a new major final like TB3 and concurrently (de facto) cut off support for TB2, actually not beeing able to at least *announce* the next update after now *five weeks* for a critical(!) bug (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases).
At first, Simon Paquet wrote on 12/22/09 that there are no plans for a TB 184.108.40.206 release (http://www.meinews.net/showpost.php?p=4 ... ostcount=3), then there is a 220.127.116.11pre which won't be released final for 4 weeks now, then on 01/19/10 Dan Mosedale writes "I'm not sure why you seem to believe 18.104.22.168 has been dropped. It hasn't been, and we've always planned to not do so until we think 3.x is good enough." (http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla. ... d0dcb9f0f/), but nothing happend since...
Meanwhile TB2 users only want one thing: Please stop talking and get a secure 22.214.171.124 final out fast!
There are many loyal users out there which want to (or have to, think of companies) use TB2 for quite some time or for some reason (i.e. Add-On incompatibility). Just fix the security things and keep the rest for a possible 126.96.36.199...
sorry AIberto, I know for sure there WONT be a TB 188.8.131.52 release.
It looks like 184.108.40.206, if and when it happens, will be the very last release of the Thunderbird 2.x series.
seems right now, plans for an upcoming TB 220.127.116.11 release are put on the back burner [but NOT entirely dismissed] as Mozilla seems to be concentrating more on the TB 3.0.x and 3.1.x versions. you'll just have to wait a while (maybe until the start of spring 2010 perhaps).
for those who are impatient to wait for an official TB 18.104.22.168 release, there's always the latest 22.214.171.124pre nightly build they can try out.
Not correct. If you look at the corresponding bugzilla report you can see that the issue is not yet fixed in Gecko 1.8.1 toolkit. Therefore current Thunderbird 126.96.36.199pre builds that are based on Gecko 1.8.1 toolkit still contain the flaw and crash e.g. on the Lightning sample.
The problem is the uncertainty at the moment about end of life of TB 2. EOL is not declared, but there is no schedule 5 month after the last release.
Lot of users still use TB 2 an do not see any official statement about (extending) support of TB 2.
This is not a security problem, this is a marketing problem. The lack of information causes more damage to the product Thunderbird than a left small security problem in an old, but popular version.
From which source?
The only specific information I can find is from today's SeaMonkey meeting minutes is this post:
So, this would state that they plan a minor 1.8.1-based fix if and when Thunderbird goes ahead with their 188.8.131.52, but that release (and so likely TB's 184.108.40.206 as well) wouldn't contain all known security issues fixed. While it leaves open the possibility for further fixes if either someone volunteers backported patches (including the Gecko Core ones, which are usually involved in security issues) or they come from long-support Linux distributions, it's unlikely that anything beyond that will come on that branch. The IRC log of that meeting should be available tomorrow.
Put on the back burner... This is not a marketing problem, this is brain problem. (and that is bigger then my english problem)
Amsterdammer have you see release notes for 3.0.1? With 1.5 Ton of fixed bugs? When I will use relible stable soft, I take Tb2 with 700kg of bugs and not 3.0.1 with estimate still 5 Tons (in his the first year).
What is the point, damn? Mean MozMess, we are little kids to launch oneself invariably and unrecflecting on each new major, because MozMess celebrate it in theirs songs?
How much of yours Windows users here, change from XP to Vista in April 2007? What would say the World, MS would no more publish XP-fixes since Mai 2007, without any apt comments?
Have the Linux users here switch immediately on the same day to KDE 4.0?
Switch to Fx 3.6 from 3.5 with nothing except urls and 6 addons is not the same then switch to very big next (Tb) major with a important mail database.. With my first trail to switch to Tb3.0 - "simply" update of Tb2 to Tb3 - nothing have works. Really, NOTHING
Put in the back burner? Back burner sounds like a very known hole between two cheeks. Superb prime support, David...
That's not surprising - a couple of known issues were deferred to be fixed in 3.0.1 as they were considered "minor" enough not to hold the 3.0 release for them. Other issues, despite needed 3 alphas and 4 betas, show up only when many users in many different environments actually use the software beyond testing. So, that's kind of natural.
The problem is that the underlying Gecko 1.8.1 branch was "retired" with Firefox 220.127.116.11, thus more than a year ago. That's maintained by Mozilla Corporation and not Mozilla Messaging, thus either a courtesy of the Firefox developers or volunteer contributors (and frequently Linux distributors).
The specific bug mentioned in the introductory post and pointed to by ssitter is such a core-code issue affecting all Mozilla applications (NSPR). I don't see a pending 1.8.1 approval request though, and there hasn't been any CVS checkin on this. Thus, it is not fixed in 18.104.22.168pre nightly builds.
I mean comming, at the moment, unknown issues. You known, Fx 3.5.7 a.s.o.
From the security (or stability) point of view, its very stupid advise update from Tb2 to Tb3. Same stupid like update (way back) 2001 from W2ksp4 to XPrtm from this point of view. This is now exactly the same situation between Tb2 and Tb3.
I see you use 2010 NT5.1. I think you (and few anothers in this thread) known very good what I mean.
This was not the question...
Of corse. Maybe Tb 22.214.171.124 had 10 Tons of bugs. But also this was not the question. Right?
Ok. Point for you. But this is a inherited problem between Mozilla developers and MozMessaging developers. This is a problem of MozillaWhatever, but not a problem of Tb2 users.
This is a problematic situation. But then must be regulate between either. Me, the punked user, is it samey.
Big projects should be release from big organisations, therewith the previous project can becomes suitable support up to clear defined EOL. That what Mozilla "hosted" since years with Thunderbird was and is "to big" for Mozilla
When MozillaWhatever mean not take me seriously, I must dont take Mozillas products seriously. I can survive without Firefox and Thunderbird.
When Mozilla mean plant MozMessages his unloved bastard and close the barn door after the horse has escaped, and we launch directly to the new donkey... No f... way. Its no bigwig, Mrs. Baker.
why do you know this for sure? Are you a developer?
I think this shows (sadly) very well, that communication at Mozilla between the Foundation/Corporation and Messaging People must be a mess. I can't remember a situation in which a critical security bug for Firefox was handled so badly by means of communication to the end users (not existent), marketing failure (because this *will* hurt the reputation of Thunderbird) and (not) setting the right priorities and getting an update out fast!
ssitter and rsx11m post sth. different, what do you say to this?
I really understand that this is a problematic situation but that was also known *before* by the Mozilla Messaging people. Didn't they cared about that? Was nobody thinking of at least a basic emergency plan for a situation like this. Really, I don't get it! This all seems so very unprofessional to me...
I am very confused now. Since more than 4 weeks one can read about this pre-Version. So this were all fake messages, right?
Honest question: Is it *really* that hard (goodwill assumed) to fix that bug, compile new versions for all platforms and distribute them?
You didn't ask a question but made a statement to which I responded, that's a difference.
Be assured that I get your point, yet it depends where Mozilla Messaging sets their priorities (currently more than obviously on fixing 3.0.x bugs and working on a quick 3.1 follow-up) and whether or not they'll have the resources to take care of further 2.0.0.x backports and releases.
They probably didn't expect TB 3.0 to be delayed by almost another year from then due to some of the "must have" features turning out to be more complex to implement than anticipated.
As soon as a release version is "cut off the tree", the nightly builds go to the next version number. Thus, 126.96.36.199pre was introduced immediately after 188.8.131.52 was built.
From the point of view of the NSPR people the issue is fixed on all active branches, so they are done with this specific bug. If Mozilla Messaging cares about releasing a 184.108.40.206 version (the newsgroup thread says they do), someone will have to adapt one of the 1.9.x patches for 1.8.1 to make it work.
You should know by now that those nightlies are automated and built each day since 220.127.116.11 regardless if there were even any checkins added since.
Most certainly not, even though he sometimes acts like he knows inside information on releases and often tried to claim there will be a new release of Firefox/Thunderbird simply because the automated nighties on that branch is labelled the next version and pre on end.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest