Why don't we use Mozilla ESR in Precise?

[Jason Warner]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Viktor Basso <viktor at basso.cc> wrote:

> Yes!
> The LTS should be secure, stable and supported. Not "better, faster,
> braver" as Jason pointed out.
>

And what if we could be both? ;) In fact, we can. By embracing Firefox
proper rather than ESR, we are getting the current browser that will get
security updates and thorough testing as well as being the most stable,
secure and supported Firefox on the market. ESR, as noted by Mozilla [1],
will not be the most secure, will not be the most updated and will note be
the most supported. Additionally, we then get the updates to core
components and offer a leading edge browser rather than on lagging by as
many as 12 months. As I said earlier, ESR feels like too much risk for too
little reward.

  Jason

[1] -
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Enterprise/Firefox/ExtendedSupport:Proposal#Risks
 Risks

   - *The ESR will not have the benefit of large scale testing by nightly
   and beta groups.* As a result, the potential for the introduction of
   bugs which affect ESR users will be greater, and that risk needs to be
   understood and accepted by groups that deploy it. To help mitigate these
   risks, Mozilla will be asking organizations that deploy the ESR for
   assistance with testing alpha and/or beta builds of the ESR with their user
   base.
   - Over time, and ESR will be less secure than the regular release of
   Firefox, as new functionality will not be added at the same pace as
   Firefox, and only high-risk/impact security patches will be backported. It
   is important that organizations deploying this software understand and
   accept this.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/attachments/20120206/899ea095/attachment.html>