canmove, Confirmed users
570
edits
Firefox/Features/Installers: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Alternative proposal / Web Developer use case
(Adding section with the proposal I discussed with Sheila/Jay/Damon) |
|||
| Line 157: | Line 157: | ||
== Alternative proposal / Web Developer use case == | == Alternative proposal / Web Developer use case == | ||
(This section is by Alex Limi) | |||
=== Overview === | |||
I think the channel switcher isn't accomplishing our most important goals, and has a number of problems, which Sheila has outlined above. | |||
I'd like us to revisit what we're trying to do here. This doesn't have to be what ships with Firefox 5 or even 6, but this is the conceptually simplest and most useful for the class of people that I'm familiar with — Web Developers who want to test cutting-edge Firefox. | |||
As a bonus, this avoids a lot of the problems we run into when trying to replace the application in-place, and makes it easy to test multiple builds. | |||
I think the user that wants to suddenly switch his stable version of Firefox to Beta or Aurora doesn't really exist. I think the channel switcher has great value as a '''discovery mechanism''', but that doesn't mean we should replace the Firefox they're currently using with something else from under their feet. | |||
Instead, I want us to move to a model where the channels are self-contained and standalone, and use Firefox Sync to bring over the data if people want it to be available. | |||
I'll try to keep it short, so let me know if something is unclear because of it. I've given this quite a bit of thought over the past months. | |||
=== Web Developer use case === | |||
Here are the defining characteristics of pretty much every web developer that I have contact with in my other open source projects and consultancy companies: | |||
# They rarely want to give up the stability of their setup. They '''need''' a functional Firefox with a stable, predictable Firebug. It's their bread and butter, and they need this to always work. | |||
# They don't know about the profile manager (I'm always surprised about this, but it makes sense, since it's invoked via command line, and you have to know it exists in the first place to look for it) | |||
# They'd like to test in multiple versions of Firefox at once, especially once we hit beta, so they know what to expect from the sites they are working on, so their clients won't come back and yell at them 1 month later when the new version is out. | |||
# Having their history, bookmarks and settings available in the Beta, Nightly or whatever version they are testing is a bonus, but not super important to them. | |||
=== Goals === | |||
How I'd like us to solve this: | |||
# Make the solution conceptually simple, and make it easy to identify what browser you're actually using. | |||
# Make running the various versions in parallel dead simple, and make this '''the default behavior'''. | |||
# Use Sync to transfer data and settings, and don't try to reuse the same profile across different channels | |||
=== How it would work for them, step by step === | |||
I'm a web developer. I have the latest stable version of Firefox installed. I have two paths to discovering the Aurora/Beta channels: | |||
# By downloading it from the Firefox web site | |||
# By following a link or selecting an option in the About dialog | |||
…both of which would give me a downloadable installer instead of trying to switch the release version I have with something else. | |||
Let's say I decide to test the Beta: | |||
* I get the downloadable installer, branded "Firefox Beta" everywhere. No version numbers anywhere. | |||
* I install the thing, and end up with an entry called "Firefox Beta" in my start menu. | |||
* When I click the Firefox Beta entry, it starts '''in parallel with my existing, running Firefox'''. It has a blank profile that is associated only with the Beta. | |||
* The first page I see is "Congratulations, and thanks for helping us test Firefox Beta. Here's how to set up Sync if you want your data to exist in all of your Firefox setups." | |||
* I set up Sync, have my data & settings available, and I'm able to quick switch between Firefox and the upcoming Firefox+1 (= Beta) to see if the project I'm currently working on is working the way it should in the upcoming version | |||
** I can even run an experimental new Firebug in the Beta, and have my stable Firebug in the Release version. | |||
** When e.g. Firefox 4 release upgrades to Firefox 5, my Firefox Beta will automatically be what will become Firefox 6. | |||
* I can keep these entries around, and always be able to test the latest on each channel, with a minimum of confusion, since the application name always reflects what I'm looking at. | |||
=== Summary === | |||
If someone was testing all of our variants, their start menu on windows would then look something like this: | |||
* Firefox | |||
* Firefox '''Beta''' | |||
* Firefox '''Aurora''' | |||
* Firefox '''Nightly''' | |||
These entries would have the respective logos of the various channels. It would appear in a similar way in the Mac OS X dock. They would update on their respective channels, in a mostly silent manner. | |||
These would: | |||
# All be separate binaries, with their own directories named accordingly. | |||
# Never mention the version name in the start menu or app name. | |||
# Have separate process names, like firefox-beta.exe, firefox-aurora.exe, etc. | |||
# All of them would run in separate profiles '''by default'''. | |||
==Decisions== | ==Decisions== | ||