Comment 64 for bug 1850651
Revision history for this message
|
|
#64 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0f7b58d
(Get the code!)
(In reply to Jorg K (GMT+2) from comment #49)
> Out of interest: List those five add-ons.
I intentionally did not list them because I prefer not to give out exact details of my configuration when posting under my real name, particularly for pieces of software that are likely to get no more security updates. However, if you want to send me a private message, I'll give you the list.
(In reply to Andrew DeFaria from comment #50)
> Many extensions were broken so I was waiting for them to be updated and working before I would update my desktop but you (thunderbird not you Dan) forced this update on me.
(In reply to Andrew DeFaria from comment #54)
> AFAICT I was forced into this so Dan's statement of not forcing updates is, AFAICT, false.
Andrew, I'm afraid you've got me confused with someone else. Note that the From information for each comment is in a header, not a footer.
(In reply to Jorg K (GMT+2) from comment #53)
> Extension authors "only" had about half a year time to update their extensions. IMHO, what isn't updated by now should be considered unmaintained and not fit for use any more.
"Unmaintained" and "not fit for use any more" are not synonymous. Many Firefox and Thunderbird add-ons have continued working properly for years after their last update. Also, the Thunderbird ecosystem is a lot smaller than the Firefox one, so chances are much greater of a particular specialized add-on being the only one that implements a particular bit of functionality, thus there is a greater chance of needing to rely on a piece of software that hasn't been updated lately. And only a small minority of Thunderbird add-ons have the potential for network-facing security holes, so the argument against continuing to use unmaintained software for security reasons doesn't apply to most of them.
(In reply to Alex Ihrig from comment #57)
> That's the bad UX, when we force users to do a major upgrade instead of providing a small bugfix update to 60.9.1 (which is now available today - thanks!).
Oh! Thanks for the heads-up on that, Alex! I see that not only was it made available under https:/
(In reply to Matt from comment #58)
> > What I meant by my environment being screwed up is that when run Thunderbird shows me a basic setup, no accounts, no add-ons, nothing. I'm coming to find out it seems to have created a blank profile instead of using my existing one. But my existing one was still there so using the ProfileManager I was able to log in with the correct profile and I'm cleaning that up.
>
> That is called profile per install and is the "new" way things are done, thank you Mozilla core developers.
Ugh, and it doesn't even ask you at install-time if you want to go with your old settings or a fresh profile, the way that such software as the Nvidia drivers, VLC, etc. does it? What a horrendously hostile user experience.