Two version updates yesterday?

[JoeyG]

Just out of interest, were there two updates to 28.6.0a1 x64 portable yesterday (24 May)?

I ask because I checked for an update last night at about 01:30 Berlin time (25 May) and was told one was available. I did the update, dated 2019-05-24, and it worked fine.

I just checked again (25 May, about 14:30 Berlin time) and was told another update was available. It's also dated 2019-05-24, and it, too, works fine.

When I update, I always take a look at these two pages:
http://www.palemoon.org/unstable/releasenotes.shtml
https://github.com/MoonchildProductions ... aster12019

Since I'm not a programmer, I usually don't understand the second one, but that's my problem, no one else's.

Anyway, I'm just wondering whether the update I received today perhaps should have been dated 2019-05-25.

Hmmm, I guess it really doesn't make much difference, though.

[adesh]

Version 28.6 is not out yet and is currently on unstable channel. Unstable version is a fast moving target and will generally be updated multiple times a week (or the same day as in this case).

[Moonchild]

The unstable channel may see updates multiple times in the same day, depending on what's being worked on. That's normal.
If you don't want to be on the bleeding edge (with a risk of the browser breaking) then please don't use the unstable channel.

[JoeyG]

... If you don't want to be on the bleeding edge (with a risk of the browser breaking) then please don't use the unstable channel.

Thanks for the feedback, but Adesh provided the reply I was looking for.

Although I said I'm not a programmer, if you'll pardon me, I've been using the alpha and beta versions of browsers since the early Netscape days.

In this regard, I'm not worried about being on the bleeding edge of the PM project as a user, and I won't be fazed in the least if it breaks.

The team and you are doing a great job, and I have the utmost confidence that if PM unstable encounters problems for a day or so, you'll get it up and running as quickly as possible.

Keep up the fantastic work .

[New Tobin Paradigm]

Will we? We left the updater busted for some time and if that busts.. Then you have to update manually.

What exactly is the point of using in-development software if you are not a developer or knowledgeable in developmental testing?

If you don't follow development then you don't know what to test and can't provide much if any useful feedback.

These unstables aren't built so you can take a joy ride. As a matter of fact, I pushed for the unstable channel because at the time the anointed beta team was rather lackluster and there a stretch of "nothing to report" reports from them while a series of flaws got to release unnoticed. As well as a few refusals to test on some sites because of tinfoil privacy excuses.

It pissed me off so I did what I always do: bitched about it at length. .. uhh .. ahem.. Then I later suggested a constructive solution which was the unstable channel. Hoping interested users would be more involved in learning, testing, and contributing. At the very least it would reenforce the then under-performing beta team.

Of course I am no longer a member of such team and was interested to find out recently that it still exists. Though I believe some of the ones from the time left or otherwise became inactive. I assume any activity from them these days is working out because, and you should appreciate this, there has been nothing to report.

[JoeyG]

Will we? We left the updater busted for some time and if that busts.. Then you have to update manually.

I'm not quite sure how you define "update manually". I see two scenarios that involve human intervention: (1) Help -> Check for Updates ... and (2) https://www.palemoon.org/unstable/

Actually, I've always updated manually using one means or the other - ever since the Netscape days, including for addons - and I always will. I like to take responsibility for my life.

The same is true of my Windows installations: I don't quite remember whether Windows 3.1 had an automatic update, but I'm pretty sure Windows 95 did, and I had it turned off. In any case, I think it's interesting that one of the biggest complaints against Windows 10 has been that it updated automatically and only now, in the May 2019 update (which I still haven't tried), M$ has decided to return the decision to update to the users.

And now that we're on the topic, why is the automatic update feature needed at all? Could it be because people are too busy, too lazy, too distracted, too dumb, or have too short an attention span to maintain the software on their machine(s)? Of course if you're running an IT department at a company or university, it's a different story, but if you're sitting at home flitting between YouTube and Pinterest, you should be able to find a few minutes to manually update your browser (or OS) and read (or in my case "try to read") the change logs.

I maintain five desktops and four laptops here at home. I'm retired now, so I have enough time. Even when I was working, though, l found it important that I keep an eye on what's going on with my computers and not relegate my duty to the unseen "experts".

What exactly is the point of using in-development software if you are not a developer or knowledgeable in developmental testing?

If you don't follow development then you don't know what to test and can't provide much if any useful feedback.

You registered a similar complaint in a response to an earlier post of mine: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21520

You're right, though, I don't know what to test. I do know, however, when I try to do something with an unstable build and it doesn't work, I'm supposed to tell somebody, which I always do, though of course in my "amateur" way.

My concept is that it's better to have "normal end users" work with the test builds. The hope is that even we will, somehow, sometimes, find problems before they make their way into release versions. This can obviate the situation in which the "masses" become angry because the "pros" somehow missed the error that, for example, wipes out their bookmarks or whatever.

In any case, as always, thank you "New Tobin Paradigm" for taking the time to comment and your always-interesting observations. And my thanks to Moonchild for making the unstable builds publicly available. IMNSHO, doing so adds a tad of volunteer help and a small cadre of volunteer helpers who, like me, are dyed-in-the-wool PM fans and happy to assist in whichever way our limited capacities allow.

P.S. And I'm not completely technologically challenged. I even designed and produced my own CAT scan system:
CAT Scan

[Nightbird]

Will we? We left the updater busted for some time and if that busts.. Then you have to update manually.

You will sooner or later.
and I don't allow automatic updates.

What exactly is the point of using in-development software if you are not a developer or knowledgeable in developmental testing?

The point ?
viewforum.php?f=63
I would think that you need us who are just an average joe but who are concerned about PM and wish to contribute with whatever they can.
Always useful before an official release, no ?

If you don't follow development then you don't know what to test and can't provide much if any useful feedback.

The unstable channel is publicly available.
If problem, we can report and any feedback can be finally useful.

These unstables aren't built so you can take a joy ride.

We know.
If it breaks, our share of risk.

[JoeyG]

Nightbird's reply is more concise and to the point than mine, but I think he and I are pretty much on the same page.

[Moonchild]

and I don't allow automatic updates.

Then you shouldn't be using the unstable release. The unstable channel is a "rolling release" meaning we ask and expect people to update very regularly to stay abreast of any potential issues before they end up in a release. If you don't automatically update, you're clearly not the correct target group to be using the unstable channel and you should be using normal release versions.

I'm not quite sure how you define "update manually".

Update manually = download an installer/archive and install/extract

IMNSHO, doing so adds a tad of volunteer help and a small cadre of volunteer helpers who, like me, are dyed-in-the-wool PM fans and happy to assist in whichever way our limited capacities allow.

Which is greatly appreciated -- but also comes with some expectations from our side, namely that you make sure you remain up-to-date at all times because as this very thread indicated our development can go pretty fast on occasion and getting reports from versions that are a week or more old, for example, is usually just telling us something we already know, and in the end hinders development with noise instead of helping it.

[Nightbird]

Nightbird wrote: ↑
26 May 2019, 14:39
and I don't allow automatic updates.

Then you shouldn't be using the unstable release. The unstable channel is a "rolling release" meaning we ask and expect people to update very regularly to stay abreast of any potential issues before they end up in a release. If you don't automatically update, you're clearly not the correct target group to be using the unstable channel and you should be using normal release versions.

Sorry but i don't intend to change how i'm thinking for many years now.
And not allowing automatic updates doesn't mean that i don't check manually (very) often the unstable channel and then update.
Again my choice even if you think that i'm not in "the correct target group".
So I wonder why you don't remove the preferences.

[New Tobin Paradigm]

You sound like the beta team of old. Automatic updates IS a function that needs an eye kept on and tested. Be it actually no-touch automatic or user triggered automatic.

[JoeyG]

... make sure you remain up-to-date at all times ...

I usually check every day, and now with the heads-up you've provided, I check two or three times a day. When there's an update, I also change my signature accordingly.

Update manually = download an installer/archive and install/extract

Ummm, OK, if you say so.

If it's not too stupid a question, why doesn't using Help-> Check for Updates ... qualify as updating manually? I mean, it requires "manual" intervention. I think this is what "New Tobin Paradigm" referred to as "user triggered automatic".

[JoeyG]

You sound like the beta team of old. Automatic updates IS a function that needs an eye kept on and tested. Be it actually no-touch automatic or user triggered automatic.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I assume most people have it turned on.

I reckon, though, that it's OK for a few of us iconoclasts to resort to the manual checks. After all, as mentioned above, I've already "discovered" that the "user triggered automatic" feature was broken once upon a time.

I must confess, though, that I was a bit confused by Moonchild's response that day, though I see now that he used his "strict definition" of "update manually".

This issue should be fixed now. If you are currently on a broken version, update manually.

What I still don't know is whether the problem was fixed as a result of my having identified it or whether someone had already brought it to the devs' attention.

In any case, I certainly don't want to be a person who "hinders development with noise instead of helping it".

I know that, as long as they're still made public, no one can stop me from using the unstable builds. If you'd like me to stop posting problems I find, though, just let me know. Believe me, I won't be insulted in the least.

[coffeebreak]

I'm not quite sure how you define "update manually". I see two scenarios that involve human intervention: (1) Help -> Check for Updates ... and (2) https://www.palemoon.org/unstable/

Update manually = download an installer/archive and install/extract

why doesn't using Help-> Check for Updates ... qualify as updating manually? I mean, it requires "manual" intervention. I think this is what "New Tobin Paradigm" referred to as "user triggered automatic".

Checking for updates is not the same act as updating.
(and manual checking does NOT equal manual updating.)

When you check for updates (manually), it invokes the automatic updating system that downloads and installs updates for you.

While updating manually is to download and run the installer yourself in lieu of using the automatic system.
This is not the *strict* definition, it's THE definition.

[JoeyG]

While updating manually is to download and run the installer yourself in lieu of using the automatic system. This is not the *strict* definition, it's THE definition.

Thank you very much for the clear explanation.