What happens after Firefox 52/60 ESR is unsupported?

[JohnB_XP]

Will SeaMonkey die soon as Firefox moves away from the legacy code it relies on? Looks like we've just been getting security updates for 2.49... Would the SeaMonkey team work with Pale Moon? It's looking like SeaMonkey will be EOL by the end of 2019...

Should I switch to Pale Moon / Thunderbird / Compozer?

I've been using SeaMonkey since 2012 and always enjoyed it.

[LordOfTheBored]

I'm hoping we keep going, though I have concerns.
I've been using this since like Mozilla 0.9, I'm quite comfortable with it, and I would very much like to NOT have to move to something with a newer and objectively worse-r interface.

I'm also aware that we've been taking hits continuously since the Moz/B/Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox gang convinced Mozilla Foundation to cast us out. Though we've weathered their wild mishandling of Gecko better than most of the OTHER projects that used it, I must admit.
...
And yes, I actually tried Firefox under every name, briefly.

[therube]

No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. OK, I've decided, I'm indecisive!

SeaMonkey 2.49 is essentially FF 52.
So if FF security updates are able to be backported to SeaMonkey, then for some period of time, that is all that really matters....

SeaMonkey 2.53 is essentially FF 56.
So if FF security updates are able to be backported to SeaMonkey, then for some period of time, that is all that really matters....

SeaMonkey 2.57 or whatever future version, is quite a ways off, if it ever happens.
So if 2.49 or if 2.53 are able to get security updates, then there is less onus on 2.57...

Pale Moon 28 is "essentially" FF 52.
(PM will argue otherwise, & yes, they're "right", but still it's essentially FF 52.)
Seemingly they are able to backport or otherwise secure PM, so that should not be an issue.

Waterfox 56 is essentially FF 56.
So if he is able to backport security fixes...
(I'm unclear on his future plans. Hard for me to determine with no real forum, only [cough] reddit.)

Thunderbird, I'm not really familiar with, but, what, with TB 60, it is now "Quantum", or some sort of hybrid, not sure?
Anyhow, if that is the case, that is a newer ballgame for them, so relatively untested (as far as Quantum pieces are concerned).


IOW, so long as security is covered, there shouldn't be any immediate concerns.

All browsers have issues.
For my needs, for the foreseeable future, you know where I'm at.

[Tialon]

I'm sneaking a login at work to ask -- what happens with AMO (the extensions site)? My understanding is that legacy add-ons will no longer be found on the AMO site, come early October -- the site will be Web-extensions only at that time. Is there a plan for some alternative hosting site for SeaMonkey and other legacy add-ons, or ... ?

[therube]

https://addons.thunderbird.net/ may have them - or not.

Let's just say, I am lacking confidence.
Mozilla are simply -expletives- for doing what it sounds like they are going to do.

Otherwise, at times, various entities seemed to have done bulk "gathers" from AMO.
Now where, in what sort of state, how it might be presented ... ?

All I know is, Mozilla, & disregarding how "bad" AMO is (& it does really stink), at least has some useful information, links, files, on their website, & to simply blow it away, well -expletives-.


And do note, that if you have an extension installed, currently, then you "have it".
It's in you /extensions/ directory.
And you can always backup, move, transfer, reinstall... as needed.
(There may be some odd extensions... who knows?)


PS: With FF 62 imminent, now (as in like you haven't done it already), would be a good time to backup what you have .

[James]

For the Legacy Extensions.

https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2018/08/21/timeline-for-disabling-legacy-firefox-add-ons/

Mozilla will stop supporting Firefox Extended Support Release (ESR) 52, the final release that is compatible with legacy add-ons, on September 5, 2018.

As no supported versions of Firefox will be compatible with legacy add-ons after this date, we will start the process of disabling legacy add-on versions on addons.mozilla.org (AMO) in September. On September 6, 2018, submissions for new legacy add-on versions will be disabled. All legacy add-on versions will be disabled in early October, 2018. Once this happens, users will no longer be able to find your extension on AMO.

After legacy add-ons are disabled, developers will still be able to port their extensions to the WebExtensions APIs. Once a new version is submitted to AMO, users who have installed the legacy version will automatically receive the update and the add-on’s listing will appear in the gallery.

For more information about porting legacy extensions to the WebExtensions API is available on MDN. We encourage legacy add-on developers to visit our wiki for more information about upcoming development work and ways to get in touch with our team for help.

[Frank Lion]

I've been using SeaMonkey since 2012 and always enjoyed it.

Do I take it that you don't enjoy using the mozillaZine Search facility? - viewtopic.php?p=14803827#p14803827

There's already over 4 pages on this very subject there.

[Tialon]

Thank you very much, therube! I share the frustration and dismay, but I guess that ship has sailed/no crying over spilled milk, and all that. I have backups of backups and made sure my mom's computers do, too. I'll keep a watch on the link that you posted.

(And thank you James! That blog post is most of what triggered my question, in fact.)

Frank Lion, I was piggybacking on the other user's thread to ask my question. If such questions are more suitable for the Future of SeaMonkey thread, I hope the mods can port it over there.

[Edited to snip unnecessary text and keep to the point.]

[Frank Lion]

Frank Lion, I was piggybacking on the other user's thread to ask my question. If such questions are more suitable for the Future of SeaMonkey thread, I hope the mods can port it over there.

No, I'm fine with it. This stuff - https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-GB/seamonkey/ is useful for people to know here (it's well covered in the T/Bird forums, but not here) and the AMO blog stuff is new to most people.

I was just pointing out that the OP's points have already been covered in depth. Partly, because I don't want to repeat it all, but mainly because the existing thread examines what terms like 'EOL' and 'unsupported' actually mean.

I get it. People really mean the 'I'm hoping we keep going,' stuff and they have all been using SeaMonkey since before it existed...but that all goes nowhere. Realistic analysis does.

In practice, I reckon I'll be using SM for another 4 to 5 years, without security concerns, and what'll end it are Web Standards.

[Anonymosity]

The extensions that were written for both Firefox and SeaMonkey were copied over to addons.thunderbird.net but those that were only for Firefox were not, even though they could install and work with a little patching. I keep backups of all my installers, but only for the ones I am now using.

[Wish You Were Here]

I'm hoping we keep going, though I have concerns.
I've been using this since like Mozilla 0.9, I'm quite comfortable with it, and I would very much like to NOT have to move to something with a newer and objectively worse-r interface.

I've been using 'this' since the early days of Netscape whenever that was. I've stayed with it through the different names and flavors, but it's still the very best of all browsers in my eye. I can't imagine a day when it won't work anywhere. I blame the evil G search engine company and their efforts to manipulate the web. I do everything possible not to use them.

[tonymec]

I'm staying with Sm 2.53 (as seen in the small print at the very bottom of this post) which is just before the classical extensions' cut-off point, and from time to time (let's say every few months or so) I update it with a more recent 2.53 from Bill Gianopoulos's site http://www.wg9s.com/comm-253/ (he also compiles 2.49 and 2.57 but that newer version might not work). The builds there are for L64, W64 and Mac (not sure if Mac64 or Mac3264-Universal), the systems he uses. Anyone interested? Go ahead.

If and when web standards overtake me I'll switch to Opera or Konqueror, I don't know yet. Probably the latter if by then it still has, as it does now, a KHTML engine in addition to the WebKit engine. Not Goo??? Chr* and of course not anything that doesn't run on my Linux system.

[Anonymosity]

What about Pale Moon? That is a good browser, and more like SeaMonkey (the browser part of it anyway).

[frg]

> What about Pale Moon? That is a good browser, and more like SeaMonkey (the browser part of it anyway).

If they manage to keep it up wrt security and web standards it should be ok. In this case we could even use it as a base. I am not convinced.
They also took out some things where I really disagree with: sandbox, url-classifier and a few others. And put in cruft which should remain dead and buried like binary extensions and plugins. And while web-ext is nothing to write home about these should be made working there too instead of just announcing non-support. They could co-exist nicely with classic extensions and this would broaden the add-ons base.

I think Mozilla did a good job with Gecko 56 and this one should have been the base. Only after 57-58 Gecko degraded severly. After 60 it is imho useless to use this as a base. Hope TB manages but you can more or less write off all classic extensions here.

FRG

[therube]

If they manage to keep it up wrt security

From what I gather, that is not an issue for them.

and web standards

That could be a different matter.
And not that they can't, but simply some things they just do not want.