What happens to Pale Moon when Firefox's Holly branch dies?

[jumba]

That would be only a few weeks away.

ESR is our hope! The next australis enabled ESR will probably be the version 32. That is quite ahead but still won't stop the issue.

I've been under the impression that "australis is going to fail, no doubt" and they need to rework it. But on every new release it's getting closer..

[Night Wing]

I think Mozilla will keep Australis even if it's a failure and effects Firefox's market share downward. As for Holly, I think the FF developers are eagerly looking forward to the day when Holly dies since they won't have to code/maintain it anymore.

[Gary7]

I think Mozilla will keep Australis even if it's a failure and effects Firefox's market share downward. As for Holly, I think the FF developers are eagerly looking forward to the day when Holly dies since they won't have to code/maintain it anymore.

No they won't, you do not understand the rational at Mozilla as there is none.

[Night Wing]

I think Mozilla will keep Australis even if it's a failure and effects Firefox's market share downward. As for Holly, I think the FF developers are eagerly looking forward to the day when Holly dies since they won't have to code/maintain it anymore.

No they won't, you do not understand the rational at Mozilla as there is none.

I think I understand the rational at Mozilla. It's the same rational that's at Microsoft (now) and it's called.......ego.

[access2godzilla]

To answer the OP's question, Moonchild has stated that he'd rework the entire UI to retain the old UI, although that's not an easy task (in terms of time and effort required).
Only time will tell.

[Lunix]

I think Mozilla will keep Australis even if it's a failure and effects Firefox's market share downward. As for Holly, I think the FF developers are eagerly looking forward to the day when Holly dies since they won't have to code/maintain it anymore.

No they won't, you do not understand the rational at Mozilla as there is none.

I think I understand the rational at Mozilla. It's the same rational that's at Microsoft (now) and it's called.......ego.

I agree with this 100%, and fear what will happen to Pale Moon once Firefox is completely esconced in their Australis nonsense.

[Night Wing]

@Lunix,

I wouldn't be too worried. The present Pale Moon is built on the Firefox ERS version, therefore Pale Moon will be safe from the Australis UI look until Firefox 31.0 ESR is released which should be in July. Then, I think Moonchild will have a few tricks up his sleeve and hopefully, will make a fork.

[Moonchild]

To answer the OP's question: nothing will happen. Pale Moon is currently based on v24ESR and I intend to ride that train until it reaches its terminus (which is quite a bit away) and will tackle switching of code base if and when it becomes prudent. If Mozilla is smart, they will retain a "Holly" branch instead of trying to force-feed Australis to all users. I don't think the current ESR corporate users are going to be happy with that.

I looked at the Holly branch, and that would still have all the undesirable other "fixes" (read: feature removals) that were implemented to prepare the back-end for Australis' greatly reduced feature set. There are absolutely no reasons at this time to consider using a later code base currently in production @Mozilla. None whatsoever.

[ACM79]

To answer the OP's question: nothing will happen. Pale Moon is currently based on v24ESR and I intend to ride that train until it reaches its terminus (which is quite a bit away) and will tackle switching of code base if and when it becomes prudent. If Mozilla is smart, they will retain a "Holly" branch instead of trying to force-feed Australis to all users. I don't think the current ESR corporate users are going to be happy with that.

I looked at the Holly branch, and that would still have all the undesirable other "fixes" (read: feature removals) that were implemented to prepare the back-end for Australis' greatly reduced feature set. There are absolutely no reasons at this time to consider using a later code base currently in production @Mozilla. None whatsoever.

If Mozilla ditch Holly, future ESR's contain Australis, and the time comes when you absolutely have to switch code base ... do you think it would be easier to fork SeaMonkey than to continue using Firefox as a base for Pale Moon? ie take Seamonkey, strip it to the browser only, then implement changes to SeaMonkeys UI to bring it up to 24ESR functionality?

I know nothing of programming btw so I'm just "throwing that idea out there". It's just that as an end user, Seamonkey seems to resemble 24ESR a lot more than Australis does (or at least .. it feels like it would require less work to make Seamonkey as usable as 24ESR than to make Australis as usable as 24ESR). It may also solve the problem of version numbers & addons? (thats a complete guess).

[Moonchild]

If Mozilla ditch Holly, future ESR's contain Australis, and the time comes when you absolutely have to switch code base ... do you think it would be easier to fork SeaMonkey than to continue using Firefox as a base for Pale Moon? ie take Seamonkey, strip it to the browser only, then implement changes to SeaMonkeys UI to bring it up to 24ESR functionality?

I know nothing of programming btw so I'm just "throwing that idea out there". It's just that as an end user, Seamonkey seems to resemble 24ESR a lot more than Australis does (or at least .. it feels like it would require less work to make Seamonkey as usable as 24ESR than to make Australis as usable as 24ESR). It may also solve the problem of version numbers & addons? (thats a complete guess).

The basic problem here is, as I said, that the current Holly branch still has a lot of stuff removed from it that was only removed in light of Australis (although different rationales are given officially, that's what it boils down to -- and at the very least the reasons given for it have been for "Mozilla internal development advantages" only like "maintenance cost" and none of it for the betterment of the browser or its users) meaning the feature set is still stripped in Holly. My dilemma would then be: Take Holly as a base with non-release code that requires a lot of re-implementation, or stay with v24 as long as possible and move over to the Mozilla core when the time comes but porting forward my current interface and feature set? I'd rather do the latter, if for no other reason than to keep the browser future-proof. Meaning, in short, trying to fully separate UI from Core and make it as modular as possible. Since it's a XULrunner application, this would be an option as long as Firefox stays on Gecko.

Switching to SeaMonkey would be a lot of work as well, introduce a number of other things I don't really want and stripping out everything but the browser means having to mangle the entire build system... which can severely break things, and there's no guarantee that that project won't be "Australified" as well down the road which would land me in the same boat again. SeaMonkey's goals are also different than Pale moon's and I'd have to see in the first place if SM's edits are in line with what Pale Moon needs.

In the end though, there's one other thing to consider as well: Will there be a pressing need to switch code base, all things considered? I currently don't see one, since all of the work in FF25 and later has been focused on Australis, B2G and mobile. Unless there's going to be some major advancement in another area, there won't be a reason to switch any time soon, at all. Especially not if things can be back-ported, like I've done with TLS 1.2, augmenting the current browser with desired features. If extensions are a consideration, notice that extension developers have been dropping away because Mozilla makes too many changes, too fast in succession, and leading to developer fatigue, just to push this UI "refresh" (mind the quotes).

[access2godzilla]

Should I read that as "PM continues with 24 ESR branch even after EOL"?

And which of the well known extensions are dropping out?

[Moonchild]

Should I read that as "PM continues with 24 ESR branch even after EOL"?

No, you should read that as "I'll evaluate this when the time comes". Depending on the state of the code at EoL for 24ESR and available alternatives, I may stay on 24ESR, switch code base, or do something else altogether.

And which of the well known extensions are dropping out?

I would hope none, but talking in general about add-on developers getting less eager to continue supporting their extensions with the constant tinkering done and having to account for many compatibility issues every 6 weeks.

[mgagnonlv]

Just to throw another wrench in the discussion, what about Firefox 17 ESR, or 21-22 as the basis for future endeavours? It is around FF 22 or 23 that Firefox lost one key feature, the possibility of using a different search engine in the search bar and in the address bar. Fortunately, "Keyword Search" allows to circumvent the problem, but it adds yet another extension to the already too long list for something that was a great feature beforehand.

All in all, what would be great would be if enough developers forked out of Mozilla Firefox to make it a viable alternative. So far, I have seen that happening successfully only once, with LibreOffice. I doubt it will happen with Firefox, alas.

[Moonchild]

Nice wrench, but people in general prefer to use one search engine, and if they want to use another, it's a single click away. It definitely is something I want to keep in Pale Moon because having the one search engine of choice unified in address bar, search bar and about:home (and switched in a single operation in all three) improves searching functionality for the large majority of people. I consider it an improvement in usability.

17ESR is lacking some key features in the back-end that I want to keep and in general needed a lot more core engine work done. Same for 21-22, although it tackled the graphics/rendering part.
There's a good reason I chose 24ESR as a base, since Mozilla held off on most of the experimental features and "Australis preparation" removals until v25 (so the corporate users wouldn't have too much of a shock to deal with hopping ESR branches) while keeping all of the improvements made. Reinstating the all tabs panel and removing the never-finished "panorama" feature from the core was also a logical step in picking a feature set that contains generally favorable features and removing unnecessary or unfinished code, striking as much of a balance as possible in the current feature set of Pale Moon. As people have noticed, being able to focus on actual development not having to run after the 6 week schedule has also allowed me to tackle some much longer standing "to do" items and repairing some of the damage done before v24ESR was released.

I'm going to wait and see how well (or poorly) Australis is going to be received when it hits the release channel. But this gradual removal of features has already set bad blood without the larger overhaul among users; I think it'll just get worse.

Time will tell.

[dark_moon]

Btw here is a survey against the australis design: https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1512875/ ... -29-Survey

[jumba]

Btw here is a survey against the australis design: https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1512875/ ... -29-Survey

Aurora Australis 29 Survey
Customization

With new menus, toolbars and drop-downs, Firefox should be more customizable than ever.

Nonsense! I hope they accept my criticism constructively.

[Night Wing]

I also took the survey. Just to rub a little salt in Mozilla's wounds, I told them I was taking the survey in a newly released linux browser, linux Pale Moon which has replaced Firefox making Pale Moon my default browser in linux....which I think they will confirm when they run my tag line.

I also told Mozilla linux Pale Moon came about because of the dislike of the Australis UI with it's lack of customization "within" the browser since the Firefox developers keep removing things (by deleting code) old time users of Firefox liked.

I hope eventually many Firefox non-technical users (like myself) don't update to Australis. This might change the mindset at Mozilla just like the mindset of Microsoft was changed when XP and Windows 7 users wouldn't update/upgrade to Windows (8/8.1) forcing Microsoft to admit Windows (8/8.1) hasn't been well received in the market place and it's low percentage of use confirms it. I'm hoping the same results happen with Australis.

As they say, "time will tell".

[access2godzilla]

Just to rub a little salt in Mozilla's wounds, I told them I was taking the survey in a newly released linux browser, linux Pale Moon which has replaced Firefox

So you really think that they read through all the comments they receive?

Anyway, if the new devs at Mozilla think that its too much code to maintain, they should not have joined Mozilla at all.

[Night Wing]

Just to rub a little salt in Mozilla's wounds, I told them I was taking the survey in a newly released linux browser, linux Pale Moon which has replaced Firefox

So you really think that they read through all the comments they receive?

Anyway, if the new devs at Mozilla think that its too much code to maintain, they should not have joined Mozilla at all.

If the head honchos at Mozilla don't read these comments, then they're fools. This is basically the same circumstance with regards to Microsoft when the beta testers said Windows 8 wasn't going to be received well by the Windows XP and 7 users and their beta testers were correct according to Windows 8/8.1's public market share as of today's date.

As for the Mozilla developers, in my opinion I think (for most of them) their coding skills aren't as good as they think they are or since they don't want to maintain the coding which brings customization "within" the Firefox browser, then they're just plain lazy since most of the comments I've read which they've typed, they state by removing code it makes their jobs easier which seems to be a big point with them.

[access2godzilla]

They don't read every comment -- but they do look for things such as "horrible", "awesome" to understand where things are going.

Reorganising things isn't bad -- but the way Mozilla devs are doing this is wrong.