Ubuntu

Bug #94494
Comment #44

Comment 44 for bug 94494

Revision history for this message

John Vivirito (gnomefreak) wrote on 2009-04-08: Re: [Bug 94494] Re: [needs-packaging] Songbird

#44

On 04/07/2009 02:47 PM, stevel wrote:
> Russell Philips wrote:
>> I don't think the problem is so much the 'one-click install' that some users expect. It's the security implications of installing software that's exempt from automatic updates through apt.
>
> Doesn't Firefox/Thunderbird have this same issue? I don't think (fta or
> someone else on ubuntu-mozillateam can correct me if I'm wrong)
> automatic-updating is an issue... the issue is Ubuntu's (justified)
> desire for Songbird to use system-wide installed libraries (GStreamer,
> XULRunner, etc.) instead of private copies (like Songbird currently
> uses). Continued use of private copies in Songbird puts an unfair
> maintenance burden on the ubuntu-mozillateam guys who have to backport
> security fixes to multiple codebases, etc.
>
> John Vivirito wrote:
>> As i understand it upstream songbird has stbility flaws and lack of upstream maintaining the app. You really should check with fta on IRC in #ubuntu-mozillateam for more info.
>
> I think that's a bit of an unfair characterisation.
>
> While criticisms of stability might be fair (I'd like to point out that
> a ton of work in the past 3 releases have gone into 'crasher' bugs), we
> can only fix the crasher bugs we know about (e.g. blanket statements of
> "stability flaws" aren't useful; crash reports and bugs filed are).
>
> The claim of lack of upstream maintenance, as far as I can tell is
> completely unfounded. We've taken many patches to our own code,
> upstreamed all of our GStreamer patches, upstreamed many of our
> XULRunner patches (not all have been accepted upstream), and
> consistently put out new releases every 3-4 months. While Songbird,
> undoubtedly, has many flaws.... I think this is not one of them.
>
I have not been updated on this since my post containing lack of
upstream and i got that from fta on IRC, as for stability issues
updating for gstrreamer ect.. does nothing to improve stability. This
had a problem with xulrunner (don't recall exactly ) if you are
packaging it or plan to it would be nice to look at code changes in past
few releases if you have changelog and patches from upstream and Debian
dir. changes. My comments above this when it was requested for Jaunty at
that time stand now as for KK not sure what the plan is but IIRC fta has
no intentions to push it officially but you would have to check with him
since its his package.

--
Sincerely Yours,
John Vivirito

https://launchpad.net/~gnomefreak
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/JohnVivirito
Linux User# 414246

"How can i get lost, if i have no where to go"
-- Metallica from Unforgiven III

On 04/07/2009 02:47 PM, stevel wrote:
> Russell Philips wrote:
>> I don't think the problem is so much the 'one-click install' that some users expect. It's the security implications of installing software that's exempt from automatic updates through apt.
> 
> Doesn't Firefox/Thunderbird have this same issue?  I don't think (fta or
> someone else on ubuntu-mozillateam can correct me if I'm wrong)
> automatic-updating is an issue... the issue is Ubuntu's (justified)
> desire for Songbird to use system-wide installed libraries (GStreamer,
> XULRunner, etc.) instead of private copies (like Songbird currently
> uses).  Continued use of private copies in Songbird puts an unfair
> maintenance burden on the ubuntu-mozillateam guys who have to backport
> security fixes to multiple codebases, etc.
> 
> John Vivirito wrote:
>> As i understand it upstream songbird has stbility flaws and lack of upstream maintaining the app. You really should check with fta on IRC in #ubuntu-mozillateam for more info.
> 
> I think that's a bit of an unfair characterisation.
> 
> While criticisms of stability might be fair (I'd like to point out that
> a ton of work in the past 3 releases have gone into 'crasher' bugs), we
> can only fix the crasher bugs we know about (e.g. blanket statements of
> "stability flaws" aren't useful; crash reports and bugs filed are).
> 
> The claim of lack of upstream maintenance, as far as I can tell is
> completely unfounded.  We've taken many patches to our own code,
> upstreamed all of our GStreamer patches, upstreamed many of our
> XULRunner patches (not all have been accepted upstream), and
> consistently put out new releases every 3-4 months.  While Songbird,
> undoubtedly, has many flaws.... I think this is not one of them.
> 
I have not been updated on this since my post containing lack of
upstream and i got that from fta on IRC, as for stability issues
updating for gstrreamer ect.. does nothing to improve stability. This
had a problem with xulrunner (don't recall exactly ) if you are
packaging it or plan to it would be nice to look at code changes in past
few releases if you have changelog and patches from upstream and Debian
dir. changes. My comments above this when it was requested for Jaunty at
that time stand now as for KK not sure what the plan is but IIRC fta has
no intentions to push it officially but you would have to check with him
since its his package.

-- 
Sincerely Yours,
    John Vivirito

https://launchpad.net/~gnomefreak
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/JohnVivirito
Linux User# 414246

"How can i get lost, if i have no where to go"
    -- Metallica from Unforgiven III