sense of packaging firefox' addons?

[Arthur Pemberton]

2008/2/28 Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net>:
> Le mercredi 27 février 2008 à 13:22 -0800, Andrew Farris a écrit :
>
>
>  > The builtin firefox addon update system works far faster for most desktop users
>  > than getting a new rpm packaged, built, and shipped...
>
>  I works far faster for update freaks that love hunting the internet for
>  software bits and always update to the latest version.

You know Firefox checks for updates automatically, right?

> It's pretty
>  useless for the large class of users who want their apps to just work

Requiring admin to install some addons via RPMs is your idea of just work?

>  and are not willing to invest large parts of their time in extension
>  hunting.

As opposed to searching through the repos with yum for the extension
you want? How much easier is that than going to addons.mozilla.org?

> And some extensions have been known to have security holes, so
>  relying on users to update extensions when all do not is going to bite
>  us sooner or later.

So the users won't hit install when Firefox offers them the updates,
but they will run yum update to get updates?

>  The Firefox addon update system is far from awesome when you're the one
>  who has to install and update Firefox extensions manually on a pool of
>  systems because users don't bother (additionally that's one reason

And how many people are there like that? You know you can just create
your own RPM for your pool of users, and get what you want done.

>  Firefox fares so bad in the enterprise — geek-oriented installation
>  system without any provision for centralised management).

What kind of enterprise is willing to run Firefox on Linux but not
willing to roll out their own supplemental apt/yum repository?

-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )