[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: sense of packaging firefox' addons?

For the single end user that manages his /her own computer, it doesn't matter how the add-on is deployed. In fact, there are advantages to the way Firefox handles it. In an environment that is managed by a "professional" , using the distribution package manager for add-ons has many advantages.

As an administrator, I would prefer to control what Firefox and Thunderbird add-ons my users have access to, and allow the system- wide management tools to tell me what add-ons are installed and what are the exact versions of those add-ons. Some add-on versions are locked to a specific Firefox version. An administrator would take that into account when rolling out updates. yum /rpm could bark if an update to Firefox was attempted before an updated add-on was available ( as long as the correct version requires were in the add- on package ).

Code for self-application updates ( and add-on updates ) is IMHO wasted effort since the code and infrastructure already exists in the distro platform ( yum, rpm ). Only in the proprietary OS world do applications need to re-invent the update wheel because the OS update mechanism is closed to most application developers and is only available to the OS vendor for its own applications. Having Firefox update itself and its add-ons is a consequence of its deployment on Windows. It is not necessarily the best way on Linux.

Charles Dostale

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]