Mozilla To Remove User-Facing Firefox Version Numbers

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

Mozilla takes Firefox version numbers to the next level? by removing them

A great collective gasp issued from tuned-in Firefox fans when Mozilla announced that it was switching to a Chrome-like release schedule for its browser. The goal was to make Firefox more adaptable and to keep pace ? though not with Chrome specifically, but rather with the rapidly-evolving web.

One side effect of a rapid release schedule is skyrocketing version numbers, something both Google and Mozilla want users to ignore. But that?s a tricky proposition when users have been raised on slowly-climbing digits trailing the names of their favorite apps. Rather than cling to traditional versioning ideas, companies are now pushing channels ? constantly updated snapshots of the different development stages of a program. Both Chrome and Firefox now offer stable, beta, and bleeding-edge versions to suit a user?s wants.

Mozilla, though, wants to make sure that version numbers are buried deep with its browser where only developers, enthusiasts, and sniffing code can call them up. Over on Bugzilla, the always outspoken Asa Dotzler has posted Bug 678775 to get the ball rolling. As Dotzler states, it?s just another step in a process that is already ?well under way.?

The bug has sparked some rather intense discussion ? more than you might expect for something as seemingly minor as hiding the version number on the About Firefox window. Functionally, the window is ?about? letting you know whether or not an update is available and to download that update if one is available but hasn?t been pulled down automatically. While the version number is displayed, it?s certainly not a critical element. The proposed tweak would remove the number and instead display a line about when the last update was applied and whether or not your install is current.

But suppose you had to call for assistance with a critically important web app like online banking or webmail. Where would you turn to look up version information if the support analyst asked you to do so? Firefox also offers the about:support page which provides much more detailed version information for troubleshooting purposes.

While that means you can still find the version number when you need to, it flies in the face of what?s long been accepted as a standard practice. As developer Dave Garrett points out, Help > About is where just about every program under the sun shows its version number. Mozilla has never been afraid to blaze trails and it certainly doesn?t have to follow suit, but the change is still a somewhat curious one for a foundation that is all about standards.

Source: extremetech.com via Slashdot

View: Bugzilla entry for the proposed change

[Andrew Lyle Global Moderator]

I think the version number on the About page should stay. Being on the enthusiast end of it, I just want to make finding version numbers easier, not harder.I don't want to install third-party apps that do this for me.

[ViperAFK]

Good move, hopefully this stems the tide of ignorant bitching about unimportant version numbers.

[neufuse Veteran]

people like mozilla make version numbers meningless..... the whole major.minor.build.revision stuff just gets thrown out over a bunch of OMG I HAVE A HIGHER NUMBER HTEN YOU!!!!!!111!1! crap..... I sware thats the only real reason they have for it is just to play catchup to IE and Google number wise.... everything that was in 5 could of been 4.5 and everything in 6 could of been like 4.8 maybe 5...

[Phouchg]

Must be something in their water supply that made them go so stupid at such a highly accelarated pace :blink:

[Rigby]

Version numbers became meaningless when it became all about marketing. It's nothing new though, remember when Netscape skipped an entire major version just to "catch up" with IE, as if the number alone made any real difference. Microsoft has done it also. There was no Windows NT 1.0 because they wanted it to start even with the current consumer Windows version.

[threetonesun]

But suppose you had to call for assistance with a critically important web app like online banking or webmail. Where would you turn to look up version information if the support analyst asked you to do so? Firefox also offers the about:support page which provides much more detailed version information for troubleshooting purposes.

Err, so these future versions are not going to be backwards compatible? Are there web developers out there trying to break future browsers already? This hypothetical situation seems like a complete non-issue.

[+Heartripper Subscriber¹]

highly accelarated pace :blink:

the version rate is about one each 2 month, which is the same as google chrome. But i haven't seen anyone here saying chrome's release pace is 'highly accelerated'

[ViperAFK]

people like mozilla make version numbers meningless..... the whole major.minor.build.revision stuff just gets thrown out over a bunch of OMG I HAVE A HIGHER NUMBER HTEN YOU!!!!!!111!1! crap..... I sware thats the only real reason they have for it is just to play catchup to IE and Google number wise.... everything that was in 5 could of been 4.5 and everything in 6 could of been like 4.8 maybe 5...

Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? With this kind of development model version numbers do not matter, its simply timed-based releases. Just the fact that they want to move in the direction of chrome, basically removing user-facing version numbers shows its NOT about "I have a higher version number than you". It never has been, people like you try and make it seem that way for some unfathomable reason. You are imagining your own controversy here and its absurd.

Why would they try and catch up to chrome's version numbers? Who cares about chrome's version numbers? They don't show it on any of the main pages on chrome's website, and only on the about box in the browser. Your average joe will probably never notice chrome's version numbers. Tell me, how does this sound like a version number game to you? The main reason mozilla decided to simply up the number by 1 every release is that they want to ditch major/minor completely, for the sake of simplicity. They don't want to debate what constitutes a "major" or "minor" release. Its time based, new version every six weeks, number goes up every six weeks. The new model is about faster, more consistent releases, and getting features distributed to the end users in a more timely manner. It is NOT about number wars.

Would it really make a difference to you if firefox 6 was 4.5? it would still be the same release, different number. Stop making a mountain out of a molehill. Version numbers simply are not important in a purely time based release schedule. This is like saying ubuntu is trying to beat windows' version number because it increases rapidly.

Anyway, I doubt the "about:support" window will be going anywhere.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

i just dont like the fast versioning - what is google and mozilla going to do when theyre at version 22? "New for 2013! Firefox 22 and Chrome 35!" :wacko:

[Anibal P]

Should have never been about the number, should have always been about Internet Explorer, Firefox,Opera, and Chrome, see how much easier it is? Browser vs browser.

i just dont like the fast versioning - what is google and mozilla going to do when theyre at version 22? "New for 2013! Firefox 22 and Chrome 35!" :wacko:

what Google does now, give you a link to Chrome, you don't see a number just the name, it's all that matters

[ViperAFK]

i just dont like the fast versioning - what is google and mozilla going to do when theyre at version 22? "New for 2013! Firefox 22 and Chrome 35!" :wacko:

Chrome never really advertises like that. Firefox has in the past but it looks like that will be changing. This very topic is about how they want to remove user facing version numbers. Why would they do that if they want to shout "New firefox 22" from the hills? That makes no sense at all.

[Rigby]

what Google does now, give you a link to Chrome, you don't see a number just the name, it's all that matters

I'm just puzzled why they even do it. If it's not for marketing and only for their developers why the huge jumps with every little release. Wouldn't it make more sense to use sane version numbers more consistent with the way every other program does it?

[Descartes]

What's the big deal if they're only meaningful to developers of said applications?

what is google and mozilla going to do when theyre at version 22? "New for 2013! Firefox 22 and Chrome 35!"

The entire topic is just about Mozilla aiming NOT to do that. Also, Google never did that either (the only place where you actually see the version number is the friggin' About box)

[ViperAFK]

If it doesn't matter why does Google do it. If the version numbers are only for their developers why not use sane ones instead of the huge jumps with every little release?

Simplicity. As I mentioned in my post above, its time based releases, so it would be stupid to try and apply the major/minor version scheme to it. this numbering scheme works very well for what chrome and firefox are doing. It works especially well for the channel architecture they have. stable/beta/dev, stable/beta/aurora all have 1 version number between them. Clean and easy to understand.

How hard is it for people to understand that major/minor version numbers have no place in a time based release schedule?

[Anibal P]

I'm just puzzled why they even do it. If it's not for marketing and only for their developers why the huge jumps with every little release. Wouldn't it make more sense to use sane version numbers more consistent with the way every other program does it?

Who cares about the version? For the nonsavy it's just Chrome or FF, for the technically minded it's still the same thing, Chrome or FF, as long as you are on the current version which is the only available version doesn't matter if it's version 1 or 100

[insanelyapple]

I think the version number on the About page should stay. Being on the enthusiast end of it, I just want to make finding version numbers easier, not harder.I don't want to install third-party apps that do this for me.

I think that would be just a cosmetic change that will help end stupid number version wars - youll be still able to check browser version by typing for example about: "address" in address field.

[Phouchg]

The new model is about faster, more consistent releases, and getting features distributed to the end users in a more timely manner. It is NOT about number wars.

Do you realize how ridiculous you sound all the time?

[ViperAFK]

Do you realize how ridiculous you sound all the time?

No, because I am making sense. What you quoted is literally the whole point of this new release schedule. People bitching about arbitrary numbers? Now that is ridiculous.

Let me re-iterate:

How hard is it for people to understand that major/minor version numbers have no place in a time based release schedule?

[+Heartripper Subscriber¹]

Do you realize how ridiculous you sound all the time?

Actually "ridicolous" is that in each firefox-related topic we come to talk about version number. Cmon guys, get over it.

[Phouchg]

Nothing is faster here. Mozilla developers have not magically become hamsters on coffee. They code all the planned features according to their abilities and the (revised) schedule. The project lead would then greenlight a release as he sees fit. Or have it time-based (which is rarely a sound software development practice for complicated programs - at least I was told so at my studies). It is probably the very aim of the numbers game to make fanbois believe that development has now been twin-turbocharged. This constant "but now it's all faster, it's fasterrrrr hurr hurr" borders on some kind of obsession.

I support removing the numbers from the eyes of an Average Joe now (and Average Tech Speacialist, hurr hurr). I still hold a gripe about f*cking up it in the first place.

[ViperAFK]

Nothing is faster here. Mozilla developers have not magically become hamsters on coffee. They code all the planned features according to their abilities and the (revised) schedule. The project lead would then greenlight a release as he sees fit. Or have it time-based (which is rarely a sound software development practice for complicated programs - at least I was told so at my studies). It is probably the very aim of the numbers game to make fanbois believe that development has now been twin-turbocharged. This constant "but now it's all faster, it's fasterrrrr hurr hurr" borders on some kind of obsession.

Of course development isn't "literally" faster, I'm not an idiot. But features do get to the users faster, which is the whole point. Instead of waiting and rolling them all into major releases, whatever is finished every 6 weeks is given to the users, there's really no debating that fact. Firefox 3.6 was pretty antiquated by the competition by the time 4 was finally released, it was slower and had a very outdated interface. Numbers are irreverent here, and the fact that they want to remove them shows its not a numbers game.

This is good for the web. Features like improved html5/css support ect... Get to users faster. This release cycle makes sense for browsers with this quickly evolving ecosystem. I don't think this release cycle makes sense for a lot of programs, but I think its great for browsers.

But, I digress. If anyone wants to continue believing this is some conspiracy to increase version numbers (that users may not even see in the future!) more power to ya.

[~Johnny]

Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? With this kind of development model version numbers do not matter, its simply timed-based releases. Just the fact that they want to move in the direction of chrome, basically removing user-facing version numbers shows its NOT about "I have a higher version number than you". It never has been, people like you try and make it seem that way for some unfathomable reason. You are imagining your own controversy here and its absurd.

If it wasn't ever about version numbers, they would have just gone to Firefox 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 etc, instead of 4-5-6-7 in the space of a few months. It's not hard to fathom that they wanted to make it seem like they were making up for how long it took FFX4 to come out.

<img>

[ViperAFK]

If it wasn't ever about version numbers, they would have just gone to Firefox 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 etc, instead of 4-5-6-7 in the space of a few months. It's not hard to fathom that they wanted to make it seem like they were making up for how long it took FFX4 to come out.

<img>

Simply increasing it by one is cleaner. The channels would be more confusing that way, there wouldn't be as clear as a differentiator between the version numbers of stable/beta/aurora/nightly. Chrome is doing the same thing, and I don't see this absurd bitching in every chrome thread...

[Phouchg]

To my mind, nothing under the sun prevented releases from being issued at an arbitrary pace in the first place. However, before someone cleverly decided on agitating the whole damn internets about it, Firefox was on a downslope (it still is, but that's not the point). Now everybody's pulling each other by the ballhair about these numbers. They are talking about Firefox! Firefox gets on the front page of every damn news site and on the top of the forums without even doing anything remotely useful to the "making of better internets". But it can't be a marketing plot, nowai. That wouldn't make any sense.

...

Ok. I get it. Once again. I'll get my coat.