http://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2012/01/10/delivering-a-mozilla-firefox-extended-support-release/

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Enterprise/Firefox/ExtendedSupport:Proposal#Proposal

Firefox 10.0 is scheduled for Jan 31st, along with ESR 10.0.

Each ESR release version will be supported for 54 weeks.

This is when support for the old Fx 3.6.* will finally end shortly after.

Awesome! thank you.

It's a good idea for Firefox to produce more frequent releases, most people would have no problem there.

The problem is that the release number have stopped giving vital information - they no longer uses the second digit. So now there's no distinction between major releases and minor releases. FF may pretend they are all major, but a major release every six weeks is impossible...

FF needs to again distinguish between a major release eg FF10 and minor releases eg FF10.1, 10.2, 10.3. These numbers tell us if the new offering can be safely installed without a lot of concern, or if it needs major investigation!

We need the information contained in both parts of the release number! Please stop pretending, stop the BS!

Is there some type of law that I am unaware of that specifies what numbering system is allowed to be used for software, and defines major and minor releases with regards to the numbering system for said software?

Releases are now releases and are full version numbers, major and minor aren't part of the lexicon for Firefox release versions, only for ESR versions if that is how Mozilla decides they should be categorized. But it looks like they are going to be called ESR point releases. A "chemspill" version for emergency Bug fixes aren't postponed to a new release version and security fixes that are deemed extremely important will have a #.0.# designation, as in 9.0.1. Currently there are no plans for any #.#.# releases, as in 9.1.0.

This is not the first time that Mozilla has changed the numbering setup for Firefox versions. Firefox 1.0 used a #.#.# system that ran from 1.0 to 1.0.8 . Then with Firefox 1.5 they added a digit-dot that wasn't used and that version ran 1.5 to 1.5.0.12 - the change from 1.5.0.9 to 1.5.0.10 caused some users to raise all hell as it wasn't a "normal" mathematical progression that some people thought was "proper". Firefox 2.0 continued that numbering scheme and ran from Firefox 2.0 thru 2.0.0.20.

With Firefox 3.0 Mozilla changed the version numbering again, back to what was used in Firefox 1.0 and that continued up through the Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 versions. With Firefox 4.0 came this new system without major/minor versions and then 3 months later the Rapid Release schedule with Firefox 5.0 was started.

Call it BS if you wish, but love it, hate it, or be indifferent about the numbering system, and the loss of major / minor designations, the decision was made well over a year ago and I doubt if Mozilla is going to change it anytime in the near future.

BTW, after this lengthy explanation of the Firefox version numbering system and its' history, I almost forgot to mention that Mozilla is going to be removing the version numbers from the Help > About Firefox dialog box shortly once the silent updates are released. That will probably occur in Firefox 12.0 based upon recent changes in the 12.0 Nightly version a week or so ago. Users won't be bothered by update notifications, the update will be downloaded in the background, and it will be installed the next time Firefox is launched. Coupled with the changes made in Firefox 10.0 with extension compatibility, unless the user has an extension installed that has binary components, he may never realize that a Firefox was even installed. Or so the plan is.

Based upon your previous postings here, I suppose you are interested in the ESR release. I installed it yesterday and will probably use it as my main version, replacing the Namoroka "tester" version of 3.6.

Conventions are valuable. They enable people to know what's up without spending time investigating. Yet conventions are not law...

But ignoring convention just wastes our valuable time! As I said, the release number has now:

"stopped giving vital information - they no longer uses the second digit. So now there's no distinction between major releases and minor releases"

And this is the enormous problem! But I'm now curious, if you support the less information stance, are you willing to tell us why are you using the enterprise version?

I'm not a company or a big user, but I am busy and try to avoid wasting time. So yes please, I would like the link for the enterprise ESR version. I looked yesterday but couldn't find it...

Google is now showing this as a link to download Firefox 10 Enterprise for Mac OSX:

http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-10.0esr&os=osx&lang=en-US

thanks, Cris

I have used SMS / SCCM / LanDesk / Patchlink to support between 2,000 and 44,000 client computers in various enterprises. In the 2,000 computer enterprise Firefox actually was supported, in the 44,000 – no way it was possible then or now, but I see hope for the future.

Firefox is skipped over by many enterprises because it doesn’t fit neatly into the typical enterprise world and they don’t understand it, if it fit neatly I think most organizations would quickly embrace it. Most tech guys I know prefer Firefox but are at a loss how to support it “en mass”. The laws for versioning software are out there on the internet (called best practices) and companies use them to determine test schedules/time frames/ required approvals etc. and the version numbering is heavily relied on for change control. Lack of central control and lack of install customizing have been showstoppers for Firefox in the Corp world. The group policy and now the effort going to controlling the updates and install customization will remove two showstoppers. The versioning is more of a stumbling block a lot of communication of the files, features and difficulties can overcome that stumbling block.

Corps. are used to something called I.E. and associate a 9.0 to 10.0 with needing to rewrite web pages and internal procedures. A 9.0 to 9.1 doesn’t. The tech guys in IT will be risking their job and possibly the future of their company on Mozilla's communication of the major/minor change.

I currently support 4000 enterprise computers with LanDesk and also need to find the ESR version.

Thank You

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/10.0esr-candidates/build1/

Also check out Frontmotion who has been creating MSI builds of Firefox with the ability to lockdown settings through Active Directory using Administrative Templates since 2004 or 2005. You will probably have to check with Frontmotion to ask what their plans are for an ESR version.

As far as "best practices" & "laws", I wonder how does Chrome's version numbering system which is similar to what Firefox now uses stack up with "best practices"?

I do some field work for a multi-national corporation that requires job completion reports to be submitted online and until just recently the only browser that was "allowed" was IE 6, 7, & 8, now they allow Chrome, for smart phone users - cheaper to issue their full time employees just a smart phone rather than a phone and a laptop.

Thank You I'll check out frontmotion - I can see Firefox on the enterprise PC's a lot easy than Chrome. Smart phones are outside of my realm, our enterprise doesn't rely on them except for e-mail.