On 2021-09-03 10:20 a.m., Neil wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>
>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>
>>
> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw around
> trying to figure out why one can't.

Except that what you said was that it was unfortunate that open-source
software notifies you of an update and then downloads it for you. In no
way does it prevent you from getting things done.

--
@RabidHussar

Neil wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 8:23 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>> On 9/2/21 10:51 PM, Neil wrote:
>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>> On 9/2/2021 12:14 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>> On 8/26/21 10:10 AM, Neil wrote:
>>>>> What's with 3 TBird's "updates" in 6 days? Are there more "dueling
>>>>> code writers" than before? This is the kind of thing that gives
>>>>> "open source" a bad reputation.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. Thunderbird isn't a Mozilla product since 2012 even though it
>>>> still has the Mozilla name in some places.
>>>>
>>>> "Thunderbird is now part of MZLA Technologies Corporation, a wholly
>>>> owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation."
>>>>
>>>> <https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/01/thunderbirds-new-home/>
>>>>
>>>> 2. Reading the release notes answers many questions.
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/releases/>
>>>>
>>>> 3. Most users are still using version 78.13.0 the current release on
>>>> that train.
>>>>
>>>> 4. A new release 91.0 doesn't update from 78, a user needs to
>>>> download and install it over the 78 version.
>>>>
>>>> 5. Sometime next week, versions 78.14.0 and 91.1.0 will be released.
>>>>
>>> All versions of TBird were installed in exactly the same way on this
>>> computer for years. A notice that an updated version was available
>>> pops up, the file was downloaded and the update was installed. There
>>> was nothing unusual in the process.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>
>>
>> It is my understanding that some virus applications will force an update.
>>
>> I only use Windows Defender on my Windows laptop.
>>
> As a TBird user for decades, when I say that the update process is the
> same as it has always been, it supersedes *many* virus applications or
> anything else. EVERY version sent me to the TBird site, was downloaded
> and the .exe was run to install. Whether or not there is a reason why
> it's always been installed as an .exe instead of the way FireFox
> updates, I can't say, but I also don't see why it matters.
>
>> If you read the release notes for 91 you would see right at the
>> beginning.
>>
>> "Thunderbird version 91.0 is only offered as direct download from
>> thunderbird.net and not as an upgrade from Thunderbird version 78 or
>> earlier. A future release will provide updates from earlier versions."
>>
>> That is also in the release notes for 91.0.3.
>>
>> So, now go read them, and you will know why your 91.0 updated
>> frequently to 91.0.3.

Thunderbird (like a lot of FOSS software), is not
primarily a Windows product. It's "we do Windows as long
as it is a Free Ride".

There are still some differences between platforms, that
require special handling. Especially things
like Windows having no fork() call.

For example, I would grab a copy of the NSIS installer (free)
if I needed to make an installer for the Windows platform,
at minimal cost and effort to myself. If I needed a graphics
subsystem, I would use OpenGL (common to Linux, Unix, Windows).
I would not bother rewriting the graphics stack to use DirectX
or DirectX3D.

"Same bat station. Same bat channel." They're all there.

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/

For all of the "incorporation shenanigans", I'm not seeing
much of a change there. The first cluster, are full installers.
The .mar are incremental installers.

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/91.0.3/win64/en-US/

Thunderbird Setup 91.0.3.exe 53M 25-Aug-2021 17:51
Thunderbird Setup 91.0.3.msi 54M 25-Aug-2021 17:51

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/91.0.3/update/win64/en-US/

thunderbird-91.0-91.0.3.partial.mar 3M 25-Aug-2021 17:51
thunderbird-91.0.1-91.0.3.partial.mar 2M 25-Aug-2021 17:51
thunderbird-91.0.2-91.0.3.partial.mar 216K 25-Aug-2021 17:51
thunderbird-91.0.3.complete.mar 57M 25-Aug-2021 17:51

And that isn't a "real" msi, it's a bit of a joke as the core\
folder is exactly the same as the EXE version, so the MSI tasty
outer wrapping is a charade. It provides no additional packaging
veracity.

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/91.0.2/win64/en-US/

Firefox Setup 91.0.2.exe 53M 24-Aug-2021 10:57
Firefox Setup 91.0.2.msi 53M 24-Aug-2021 10:57

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/91.0.2/update/win64/en-US/

firefox-90.0.1-91.0.2.partial.mar 15M 24-Aug-2021 10:56
firefox-90.0.2-91.0.2.partial.mar 14M 24-Aug-2021 10:56
firefox-91.0-91.0.2.partial.mar 6M 24-Aug-2021 10:56
firefox-91.0.1-91.0.2.partial.mar 6M 24-Aug-2021 10:56
firefox-91.0.2.complete.mar 57M 24-Aug-2021 10:56

Seeing as Firefox updated, maybe it impacted Thunderbird ?

It's all very suspicious. And the best part is, you don't build
it any more from the tarball, and pulling the tree is the
working solution. The tarball might be useful if you were
tracking something down in a source file, but isn't quite as
authoritative at build time. Pulling the tree might give you
200,000 more files (Rust plus Something Else).

Paul

On 2021-09-03 11:08 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 7:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>
>>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw around
>>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>>
>>
>> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
>> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>
>
> Open source or not, as far as I'm concerned, frequent updates are a
> result of frequent bugs, and frequent bugs are a result of sloppy coding
> and releasing code before it has been adequately tested.
>
> Frequent update are a bad sign.

That's a matter of opinion.

For me, frequent updates are a sign that the programmers _fix_ their
issues often; they don't allow the user to suffer until the developer
feels like finally fixing something.

--
@RabidHussar

On 9/3/2021 8:42 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
> On 2021-09-03 11:08 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 9/3/2021 7:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>>>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw around
>>>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
>>> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>>
>>
>> Open source or not, as far as I'm concerned, frequent updates are a
>> result of frequent bugs, and frequent bugs are a result of sloppy coding
>> and releasing code before it has been adequately tested.
>>
>> Frequent update are a bad sign.
>
> That's a matter of opinion.
>
> For me, frequent updates are a sign that the programmers _fix_ their
> issues often;

We disagree. Issues should be fixed before release, not afterword.
Again, releasing code before it has been adequately tested is a bad sign.

> they don't allow the user to suffer until the developer
> feels like finally fixing something.

Good code would stop the user from suffering in the first place.

--
Ken

On 2021-09-03 11:58 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 8:42 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>> On 2021-09-03 11:08 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2021 7:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>>>>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>>>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw
>>>>> around
>>>>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
>>>> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>>>
>>>
>>> Open source or not, as far as I'm concerned, frequent updates are a
>>> result of frequent bugs, and frequent bugs are a result of sloppy
>>> coding and releasing code before it has been adequately tested.
>>>
>>> Frequent update are a bad sign.
>>
>> That's a matter of opinion.
>>
>> For me, frequent updates are a sign that the programmers _fix_ their
>> issues often;
>
>
> We disagree. Issues should be fixed before release, not afterword.
> Again, releasing code before it has been adequately tested is a bad sign.

It's all good. I'm a proponent for free software in general and try to
rely on open-source first and proprietary only if absolutely necessary.
However, I will admit that exclusively using free software is an
exercise in frustration and little more.

>> they don't allow the user to suffer until the developer
>> feels like finally fixing something.
>
> Good code would stop the user from suffering in the first place.

I imagine that the lack of testing is also a result of the lack of
users. It's easier to test software if there's millions out there
willing to do so for you. Thunderbird is popular, but it's likely that
few people have stepped forward and said that they are willing to become
crash test dummies for the product.

--
@RabidHussar

On 03/09/2021 17.08, Ken Blake wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 7:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>
>>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw around
>>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>>
>>
>> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
>> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>
>
> Open source or not, as far as I'm concerned, frequent updates are a
> result of frequent bugs, and frequent bugs are a result of sloppy coding
> and releasing code before it has been adequately tested.
>
> Frequent update are a bad sign.

Wrong. Document yourself. In the FOSS world, frequent updates are simply
a result of rapid development work. Any new tiny feature is delivered
instantly to the users. Openness.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar>

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 9/3/2021 11:36 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
> On 2021-09-03 10:20 a.m., Neil wrote:
>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>
>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>
>>>
>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw
>> around trying to figure out why one can't.
>
> Except that what you said was that it was unfortunate that open-source
> software notifies you of an update and then downloads it for you. In no
> way does it prevent you from getting things done.
>
>
I never said anything like that. To be blunt, frequent updates are a
sign of poor programming practices with insufficient testing. There are
other unfortunate things about open source, but I didn't bring those up.

--
best regards,

Neil

On 9/3/21 10:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>
>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>
>>>
>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw around
>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>
>
> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>
>

In case you are unaware, Thunderbird is only an ESR version, with a new
release once a year.

I'll refer you to the Firefox Management Calendar, which Thunderbird
closely follows.

<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/Calendar>

Some Firefox and Thunderbird users on Windows have installed other
applications which update those applications to the latest versions, not
the to the current ESR update.

Maybe one of these?

<https://www.lifewire.com/free-software-updater-programs-2625200>

--
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!

On 9/3/21 10:30 AM, Neil wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 8:23 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>> On 9/2/21 10:51 PM, Neil wrote:
>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>> On 9/2/2021 12:14 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>> On 8/26/21 10:10 AM, Neil wrote:
>>>>> What's with 3 TBird's "updates" in 6 days? Are there more "dueling
>>>>> code writers" than before? This is the kind of thing that gives
>>>>> "open source" a bad reputation.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. Thunderbird isn't a Mozilla product since 2012 even though it
>>>> still has the Mozilla name in some places.
>>>>
>>>> "Thunderbird is now part of MZLA Technologies Corporation, a wholly
>>>> owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation."
>>>>
>>>> <https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/01/thunderbirds-new-home/>
>>>>
>>>> 2. Reading the release notes answers many questions.
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/releases/>
>>>>
>>>> 3. Most users are still using version 78.13.0 the current release on
>>>> that train.
>>>>
>>>> 4. A new release 91.0 doesn't update from 78, a user needs to
>>>> download and install it over the 78 version.
>>>>
>>>> 5. Sometime next week, versions 78.14.0 and 91.1.0 will be released.
>>>>
>>> All versions of TBird were installed in exactly the same way on this
>>> computer for years. A notice that an updated version was available
>>> pops up, the file was downloaded and the update was installed. There
>>> was nothing unusual in the process.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>
>>
>> It is my understanding that some virus applications will force an update.
>>
>> I only use Windows Defender on my Windows laptop.
>>
> As a TBird user for decades, when I say that the update process is the
> same as it has always been, it supersedes *many* virus applications or
> anything else. EVERY version sent me to the TBird site, was downloaded
> and the .exe was run to install. Whether or not there is a reason why
> it's always been installed as an .exe instead of the way FireFox
> updates, I can't say, but I also don't see why it matters.
>

No versions have ever sent me to the Thunderbird site, and I run a
release, beta and daily version.

All update with a prompt that an update is available, which I accept or
decline.

"Thunderbird version 91.0 is only offered as direct download from
thunderbird.net and not as an upgrade from Thunderbird version 78 or
earlier. A future release will provide updates from earlier versions."

Thunderbird 78.x.x doesn't prompt for an update to 91.x.x, and 78.14.0
is due next week.

Somebody in another post indicated there may not be enough release
candidate testers.

If anyone wants to help, see the link in my signature. I don't use all
features and may miss something when testing candidates on Windows and
Linux.

--
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!

On 2021-09-03 4:26 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 03/09/2021 17.08, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 9/3/2021 7:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>>>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw around
>>>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
>>> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>>
>>
>> Open source or not, as far as I'm concerned, frequent updates are a
>> result of frequent bugs, and frequent bugs are a result of sloppy coding
>> and releasing code before it has been adequately tested.
>>
>> Frequent update are a bad sign.
>
> Wrong. Document yourself. In the FOSS world, frequent updates are simply
> a result of rapid development work. Any new tiny feature is delivered
> instantly to the users. Openness.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar>

This is more in line with what I've experienced. That's not to suggest
that open-source is flawless in any way but it does benefit from quick
development.

--
@RabidHussar

On 04/09/2021 04.37, RabidHussar wrote:
> On 2021-09-03 4:26 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 03/09/2021 17.08, Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2021 7:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>>>>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>>>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw
>>>>> around
>>>>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
>>>> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>>>
>>>
>>> Open source or not, as far as I'm concerned, frequent updates are a
>>> result of frequent bugs, and frequent bugs are a result of sloppy coding
>>> and releasing code before it has been adequately tested.
>>>
>>> Frequent update are a bad sign.
>>
>> Wrong. Document yourself. In the FOSS world, frequent updates are simply
>> a result of rapid development work. Any new tiny feature is delivered
>> instantly to the users. Openness.
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar>
>
> This is more in line with what I've experienced. That's not to suggest
> that open-source is flawless in any way but it does benefit from quick
> development.

Certainly.

It is a characteristic. Mozilla, I understand, has one release per
night, so you get the work of the day, good or bad. But there are other
versions; the ESR is slow to release and stable. And then there is the
normal release.

I use the ESR myself.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 9/3/2021 8:40 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
> On 9/3/21 10:30 AM, Neil wrote:
>> On 9/3/2021 8:23 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>> On 9/2/21 10:51 PM, Neil wrote:
>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>> On 9/2/2021 12:14 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>>> On 8/26/21 10:10 AM, Neil wrote:
>>>>>> What's with 3 TBird's "updates" in 6 days? Are there more "dueling
>>>>>> code writers" than before? This is the kind of thing that gives
>>>>>> "open source" a bad reputation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Thunderbird isn't a Mozilla product since 2012 even though it
>>>>> still has the Mozilla name in some places.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Thunderbird is now part of MZLA Technologies Corporation, a wholly
>>>>> owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation."
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/01/thunderbirds-new-home/>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Reading the release notes answers many questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/releases/>
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. Most users are still using version 78.13.0 the current release
>>>>> on that train.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. A new release 91.0 doesn't update from 78, a user needs to
>>>>> download and install it over the 78 version.
>>>>>
>>>>> 5. Sometime next week, versions 78.14.0 and 91.1.0 will be released.
>>>>>
>>>> All versions of TBird were installed in exactly the same way on this
>>>> computer for years. A notice that an updated version was available
>>>> pops up, the file was downloaded and the update was installed. There
>>>> was nothing unusual in the process.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is my understanding that some virus applications will force an
>>> update.
>>>
>>> I only use Windows Defender on my Windows laptop.
>>>
>> As a TBird user for decades, when I say that the update process is the
>> same as it has always been, it supersedes *many* virus applications or
>> anything else. EVERY version sent me to the TBird site, was downloaded
>> and the .exe was run to install. Whether or not there is a reason why
>> it's always been installed as an .exe instead of the way FireFox
>> updates, I can't say, but I also don't see why it matters.
>>
>
> No versions have ever sent me to the Thunderbird site, and I run a
> release, beta and daily version.
>
So what? Are you suggesting that it doesn't work that way for anyone? If
so, these are the versions that are still on this computer, the older
versions have been deleted.

From 4/9/2021 to 7/15/2021:
Thunderbird Setup 78.9.1.exe
Thunderbird Setup 78.10.0.exe
Thunderbird Setup 78.10.1.exe
Thunderbird Setup 78.10.2.exe
Thunderbird Setup 78.11.0.exe
Thunderbird Setup 78.12.0.exe

From 8/14/2021 to 8/26/2021
Thunderbird Setup 91.0.exe
Thunderbird Setup 91.0.1.exe
Thunderbird Setup 91.0.2.exe
Thunderbird Setup 91.0.3.exe

It has *always* worked that way for me from day one. Note that all are
titled "Thunderbird Setup", with no distinguishing difference between
78.x and 91.x versions. So, please stop implying that TBird doesn't
download .exe files for updates.

--
best regards,

Neil

On 9/4/21 8:38 AM, Neil wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 8:40 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>> On 9/3/21 10:30 AM, Neil wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2021 8:23 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>> On 9/2/21 10:51 PM, Neil wrote:
>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>> On 9/2/2021 12:14 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/26/21 10:10 AM, Neil wrote:
>>>>>>> What's with 3 TBird's "updates" in 6 days? Are there more
>>>>>>> "dueling code writers" than before? This is the kind of thing
>>>>>>> that gives "open source" a bad reputation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Thunderbird isn't a Mozilla product since 2012 even though it
>>>>>> still has the Mozilla name in some places.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Thunderbird is now part of MZLA Technologies Corporation, a
>>>>>> wholly owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/01/thunderbirds-new-home/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Reading the release notes answers many questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/releases/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. Most users are still using version 78.13.0 the current release
>>>>>> on that train.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. A new release 91.0 doesn't update from 78, a user needs to
>>>>>> download and install it over the 78 version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5. Sometime next week, versions 78.14.0 and 91.1.0 will be released.
>>>>>>
>>>>> All versions of TBird were installed in exactly the same way on
>>>>> this computer for years. A notice that an updated version was
>>>>> available pops up, the file was downloaded and the update was
>>>>> installed. There was nothing unusual in the process.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is my understanding that some virus applications will force an
>>>> update.
>>>>
>>>> I only use Windows Defender on my Windows laptop.
>>>>
>>> As a TBird user for decades, when I say that the update process is
>>> the same as it has always been, it supersedes *many* virus
>>> applications or anything else. EVERY version sent me to the TBird
>>> site, was downloaded and the .exe was run to install. Whether or not
>>> there is a reason why it's always been installed as an .exe instead
>>> of the way FireFox updates, I can't say, but I also don't see why it
>>> matters.
>>>
>>
>> No versions have ever sent me to the Thunderbird site, and I run a
>> release, beta and daily version.
>>
> So what? Are you suggesting that it doesn't work that way for anyone? If
> so, these are the versions that are still on this computer, the older
> versions have been deleted.
>
> From 4/9/2021 to 7/15/2021:
> Thunderbird Setup 78.9.1.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.10.0.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.10.1.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.10.2.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.11.0.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.12.0.exe
>
> From 8/14/2021 to 8/26/2021
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.1.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.2.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.3.exe
>
> It has *always* worked that way for me from day one. Note that all are
> titled "Thunderbird Setup", with no distinguishing difference between
> 78.x and 91.x versions. So, please stop implying that TBird doesn't
> download .exe files for updates.
>

They don't. Period.

--
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!

On 9/4/21 8:38 AM, Neil wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 8:40 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>> On 9/3/21 10:30 AM, Neil wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2021 8:23 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>> On 9/2/21 10:51 PM, Neil wrote:
>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>> On 9/2/2021 12:14 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/26/21 10:10 AM, Neil wrote:
>>>>>>> What's with 3 TBird's "updates" in 6 days? Are there more
>>>>>>> "dueling code writers" than before? This is the kind of thing
>>>>>>> that gives "open source" a bad reputation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Thunderbird isn't a Mozilla product since 2012 even though it
>>>>>> still has the Mozilla name in some places.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Thunderbird is now part of MZLA Technologies Corporation, a
>>>>>> wholly owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/01/thunderbirds-new-home/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Reading the release notes answers many questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/releases/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. Most users are still using version 78.13.0 the current release
>>>>>> on that train.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. A new release 91.0 doesn't update from 78, a user needs to
>>>>>> download and install it over the 78 version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5. Sometime next week, versions 78.14.0 and 91.1.0 will be released.
>>>>>>
>>>>> All versions of TBird were installed in exactly the same way on
>>>>> this computer for years. A notice that an updated version was
>>>>> available pops up, the file was downloaded and the update was
>>>>> installed. There was nothing unusual in the process.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is my understanding that some virus applications will force an
>>>> update.
>>>>
>>>> I only use Windows Defender on my Windows laptop.
>>>>
>>> As a TBird user for decades, when I say that the update process is
>>> the same as it has always been, it supersedes *many* virus
>>> applications or anything else. EVERY version sent me to the TBird
>>> site, was downloaded and the .exe was run to install. Whether or not
>>> there is a reason why it's always been installed as an .exe instead
>>> of the way FireFox updates, I can't say, but I also don't see why it
>>> matters.
>>>
>>
>> No versions have ever sent me to the Thunderbird site, and I run a
>> release, beta and daily version.
>>
> So what? Are you suggesting that it doesn't work that way for anyone? If
> so, these are the versions that are still on this computer, the older
> versions have been deleted.
>
> From 4/9/2021 to 7/15/2021:
> Thunderbird Setup 78.9.1.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.10.0.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.10.1.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.10.2.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.11.0.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 78.12.0.exe
>
> From 8/14/2021 to 8/26/2021
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.1.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.2.exe
> Thunderbird Setup 91.0.3.exe
>
> It has *always* worked that way for me from day one. Note that all are
> titled "Thunderbird Setup", with no distinguishing difference between
> 78.x and 91.x versions. So, please stop implying that TBird doesn't
> download .exe files for updates.
>

You have something wrong with your system.

Here is my latest update log on Linux for version 78.13.0.

Note the first line and the UPDATE TYPE.

Performing a staged update
PATCH DIRECTORY ~/Apps/Tb78/thunderbird/updates/0
INSTALLATION DIRECTORY ~/Apps/Tb78/thunderbird
WORKING DIRECTORY ~/Apps/Tb78/thunderbird/updated
UPDATE TYPE partial
PREPARE PATCH updater
PREPARE PATCH thunderbird-bin
PREPARE ADD removed-files
PREPARE ADD precomplete
PREPARE PATCH platform.ini
PREPARE PATCH omni.ja
PREPARE PATCH libxul.so
PREPARE PATCH librnp.so
PREPARE PATCH application.ini
PREPARE REMOVEFILE features/wetransfer@extensions.thunderbird.net.xpi
PREPARE REMOVEDIR features/
EXECUTE PATCH updater
EXECUTE PATCH thunderbird-bin
EXECUTE ADD removed-files
EXECUTE ADD precomplete
EXECUTE PATCH platform.ini
EXECUTE PATCH omni.ja
EXECUTE PATCH libxul.so
EXECUTE PATCH librnp.so
EXECUTE PATCH application.ini
EXECUTE REMOVEFILE features/wetransfer@extensions.thunderbird.net.xpi
EXECUTE REMOVEDIR features/
FINISH PATCH updater
FINISH PATCH thunderbird-bin
FINISH ADD removed-files
FINISH ADD precomplete
FINISH PATCH platform.ini
FINISH PATCH omni.ja
FINISH PATCH libxul.so
FINISH PATCH librnp.so
FINISH PATCH application.ini
FINISH REMOVEFILE features/wetransfer@extensions.thunderbird.net.xpi
FINISH REMOVEDIR features/
succeeded
calling QuitProgressUI

--
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!

Ken Blake <ken@invalidemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 8:42 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>> On 2021-09-03 11:08 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2021 7:30 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 03/09/2021 16.20, Neil wrote:
>>>>> On 9/3/2021 8:25 AM, RabidHussar wrote:
>>>>>> On 2021-09-02 10:51 p.m., Neil wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, this is typical of open source software.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is that unfortunate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Because some people use a computer to get things done, not screw around
>>>>> trying to figure out why one can't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, frequent updates is a documented advantage of open source
>>>> software. if you do not like that, install the ESR version instead.
>>>
>>>
>>> Open source or not, as far as I'm concerned, frequent updates are a
>>> result of frequent bugs, and frequent bugs are a result of sloppy coding
>>> and releasing code before it has been adequately tested.
>>>
>>> Frequent update are a bad sign.
>>
>> That's a matter of opinion.
>>
>> For me, frequent updates are a sign that the programmers _fix_ their
>> issues often;
>
>
> We disagree. Issues should be fixed before release, not afterword.
> Again, releasing code before it has been adequately tested is a bad sign.
>
>
>> they don't allow the user to suffer until the developer
>> feels like finally fixing something.
>
>
> Good code would stop the user from suffering in the first place.

Software is updated for many reasons. The quality of code is only one
reason so you can't make a judgement of the code simply by update
frequency.

Walt,

> Here is my latest update log on Linux for version 78.13.0.

I've got just one question : Do you think it is possible that the TB update
mechanism under Linux works different than under Windows ?

Do yourself a favour, and do *not* effectivily call people liars because of
what they see happening is different from what you see. Trying to figure
out (with the others help) how that would be possible (see above) is a /lot/
more constructive.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

R.Wieser wrote:
> Walt,
>
>> Here is my latest update log on Linux for version 78.13.0.
>
> I've got just one question : Do you think it is possible that the TB update
> mechanism under Linux works different than under Windows ?
>
> Do yourself a favour, and do *not* effectivily call people liars because of
> what they see happening is different from what you see. Trying to figure
> out (with the others help) how that would be possible (see above) is a /lot/
> more constructive.
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser

A picture.

https://i.postimg.cc/FR4ywxNB/Thunderbird-Linux-vs-Windows.gif

Paul

Paul,

> A picture.

Those things are said to be worth a thousand words.

Alas, the picture does not say anything about the code that implements the
upgrading. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 9/4/2021 9:58 AM, WaltS48 wrote:

> Here is my latest update log on Linux for version 78.13.0.
>
Two things;
1) this is not a Linux ng. I am not running Linux on this computer.

2) Neither ThunderBird nor FireFox run the same under Windows and Linux.
I run FireFox on both, and Android devices, and it's NOT the same on any
of the three.

But, now that I know where you're coming from, there is no need to reply.

--
best regards,

Neil

On 9/4/2021 9:58 AM, WaltS48 wrote:

> Here is my latest update log on Linux for version 78.13.0.
>
Two things;
1) this is not a Linux ng. I am not running Linux on this computer.

2) Neither ThunderBird nor FireFox run the same under Windows and Linux.
I run FireFox on both, and Android devices, and it's NOT the same on any
of the three.

But, now that I know where you're coming from, there is no need to reply.

--
best regards,

Neil

On 9/4/21 1:17 PM, R.Wieser wrote:
> Walt,
>
>> Here is my latest update log on Linux for version 78.13.0.
>
> I've got just one question : Do you think it is possible that the TB update
> mechanism under Linux works different than under Windows ?
>
> Do yourself a favour, and do *not* effectivily call people liars because of
> what they see happening is different from what you see. Trying to figure
> out (with the others help) how that would be possible (see above) is a /lot/
> more constructive.
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser
>
>

I have explained how a complete executable could be downloaded using
other apps, and Neil chooses to ignore the fact that Thunderbird only
offers partial updates. There may be an occasional full file update, but
it isn't an executable in my experience on my Windows 10 laptop.

Using Help > About Thunderbird or updating from the update prompt
doesn't download the complete executable to the hard drive for
installation later either.

Updates are .mar files.

<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Software_Update:Manually_Installing_a_MAR_file>

You can peruse the update folders for versions at:

<https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/>

Pick a version, select the update folder, select the OS, select the
language.

Sample
<https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/78.13.0/update/win64/en-US/>

--
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!

On 2021-09-04 2:29 p.m., Paul wrote:
> R.Wieser wrote:
>> Walt,
>>
>>> Here is my latest update log on Linux for version 78.13.0.
>>
>> I've got just one question : Do you think it is possible that the TB
>> update mechanism under Linux works different than under Windows ?
>>
>> Do yourself a favour, and do *not* effectivily call people liars
>> because of what they see happening is different from what you see.
>> Trying to figure out (with the others help) how that would be possible
>> (see above) is a /lot/ more constructive.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Rudy Wieser
>
> A picture.
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/FR4ywxNB/Thunderbird-Linux-vs-Windows.gif

That comparison is unfair. Since Thunderbird is open-source, it is a
part of the software included in the Linux distribution's repository.
When a new version emerges, it is included in the system updates.
Thunderbird for Windows, on the other hand, is downloaded from a site
and using something like Windows Update won't also update IT. Microsoft
seems interested in implementing a sort of software repository to
imitate Linux but the approach, until now, is entirely different.

--
@RabidHussar

Walt,

> I have explained how a complete executable could be downloaded using other
> apps,

And it seems to me that he made clear that he got that list of executables
as part of upgrade cycles, not by manually downloading them.

> and Neil chooses to ignore the fact that Thunderbird only offers partial
> updates.

And with that you are forcefully denouncing his experience, again
effectivily calling him a liar - which in turn will possibly/likely prompt
him to do the same to you. And than where does that leave you / the both
of you ?

Again, instead of trying to turn this into an "I'm right! Admit it!"
slugfest, try to figure out what happened on both sides (OS and/or
configuration differences ? Old update method vs new one ? Something else
?) that he gets those executables and you don't. As a result both you and
him could have a "learning experience". :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

P.s.
I just saw that Neil doesn't want to talk with you any further. Can't blame
him. To bad though, as I would have liked to hear what the actual cause of
the difference between your and his experience is.

On 9/5/21 3:51 AM, R.Wieser wrote:
> Walt,
>
>> I have explained how a complete executable could be downloaded using other
>> apps,
>
> And it seems to me that he made clear that he got that list of executables
> as part of upgrade cycles, not by manually downloading them.
>
>> and Neil chooses to ignore the fact that Thunderbird only offers partial
>> updates.
>
> And with that you are forcefully denouncing his experience, again
> effectivily calling him a liar - which in turn will possibly/likely prompt
> him to do the same to you. And than where does that leave you / the both
> of you ?
>
> Again, instead of trying to turn this into an "I'm right! Admit it!"
> slugfest, try to figure out what happened on both sides (OS and/or
> configuration differences ? Old update method vs new one ? Something else
> ?) that he gets those executables and you don't. As a result both you and
> him could have a "learning experience". :-)
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser
>
> P.s.
> I just saw that Neil doesn't want to talk with you any further. Can't blame
> him. To bad though, as I would have liked to hear what the actual cause of
> the difference between your and his experience is.
>
>
>

Oh good, since he is the only one experiencing this problem in all the
places I volunteer support, including alt.comp.software.thunderbbird,
mozillaZine, Topicbox, Discourse and a couple Linux forums.

Maybe he should ask on the official support site.

<https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/products/thunderbird>

--
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!

On 9/5/21 3:51 AM, R.Wieser wrote:
> Walt,
>
>> I have explained how a complete executable could be downloaded using other
>> apps,
>
> And it seems to me that he made clear that he got that list of executables
> as part of upgrade cycles, not by manually downloading them.
>
>> and Neil chooses to ignore the fact that Thunderbird only offers partial
>> updates.
>
> And with that you are forcefully denouncing his experience, again
> effectivily calling him a liar - which in turn will possibly/likely prompt
> him to do the same to you. And than where does that leave you / the both
> of you ?
>
> Again, instead of trying to turn this into an "I'm right! Admit it!"
> slugfest, try to figure out what happened on both sides (OS and/or
> configuration differences ? Old update method vs new one ? Something else
> ?) that he gets those executables and you don't. As a result both you and
> him could have a "learning experience". :-)
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser
>
> P.s.
> I just saw that Neil doesn't want to talk with you any further. Can't blame
> him. To bad though, as I would have liked to hear what the actual cause of
> the difference between your and his experience is.
>
>
>

The answer to the "So many Thunderbird updates" is that they are needed.

Firefox released a 91.0 on August 10, updated to a 91.0.1 on August 17,
which was then updated to 91.0.2 on August 24 and 91.1 will be out on
Tuesday.

--
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!