Closed Bug 1150882 Opened 6 years ago Closed 6 years ago

Lightning incorrectly unified after bug 1143163


(Calendar :: Lightning Only, defect)

Not set


(Not tracked)



(Reporter: jamesrome, Assigned: Fallen)




(1 file)

The only version of Lightning I can find that will install in Thunderbird 38 is 4.0b1. But when I start TB, I get:
Mismatched Lightning version
The binary component required for Lightning could not be loaded, likely because the wrong version combination is being used. You currently have Lightning 4.0b1 installed, but should be using a version from the 4.0 series.

Where do I get the right version?
Where did you get this version? 4.0b1 is correct, but I haven't yet tested nor uploaded it to AMO yet.
the Mac version. But it is broken, and I need it to go along with TB 38. What is AMO?

Also, it would be really great if the Lightning version numbers tracked the TB version numbers. Presently, one must do trial and error to see which version will install with a given TB release.
Severity: blocker → critical
The US English Mac version from there (the one I installed above, and reinstalled) is the one that gives the error message and does not work.
Unification failed after bug 1143163. I'll fix this manually for b1 and use this bug to fix the builds.
Assignee: nobody → philipp
Summary: No Lightning for Thunderbird 38 → Lightning incorrectly unified after bug 1143163
Please check AMO for the new version of 4.0b1
What and where is AMO?
This version fixed it. But if you google Lightning nightlies, you get, so you had better fix it too. I have been using Mozilla for decades now, and have never gone to the AMO site.
Yes, I will fix the packaging in this bug. Note that although the URL contains lightning/nightly, the 4.0b1-candidates directory is for *beta* candidates, hence the "b" in the version. If you want real nightly builds, you will have to get them from latest-comm-aurora or latest-comm-central in
Attached patch Fix - v1 β€” β€” Splinter Review
Attachment #8588416 - Flags: review?(makemyday)
Attachment #8588416 - Flags: review?(makemyday) → review+
I looked there Philipp. But they had 4.2a1. The older comm-central ones also had a bad build for 4.0.
And I reiterate my pl;ea for Lightning numbering that corresponds to the Thunderbird version. The AMO page tells the user which version it is for, but the ftp page does not.
There are now at least three places to look for the nightlies. That needs unification also!
As you can see on the versions page, there are two different channels of nightly builds, and one beta build. All nightlys can be found on the ftp server, those from the aurora channel in the latest-comm-aurora directory and those from the central channel from latest-comm-central.

Candidate builds (not for public consumption, hence "candidate") for the betas are also found there, but the authoritative source for beta versions is

Calculating Lightning version numbers from Thunderbird numbers is not all that difficult, and there is also the versions page for lookups. The ftp server is not meant for conveying more information than the builds themselves, it is merely a data store. It also matches the same or similar layout as for Thunderbird and Firefox.
Pushed to comm-central changeset 91a89249303e
Closed: 6 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → 4.1
Backported to releases/comm-beta changeset 258245e8328d
Target Milestone: 4.1 → 4.0
I know I am beating a dead horse, but how does a user know the difference between Aurora and Comm Central?
And I was not referring to the 3 versions on the ftp site, I was referring to
in addition to the ftp site.
Why not just ONE site?
I guess we could explain the differences on the versions page better. The latest changes go into central. After 6 weeks those changes are merged to aurora, 6 weeks later they go to beta. This mimics the Firefox release process, other than the fact that we don't do full releases every 6 weeks.

The ftp site is the data store for all builds, it is not meant to have a good user interface. Placing files here allows them to be distributed via the CDN given they are placed in the right directory. See the history of FTP for more details.

The addons site is what is commonly used to promote releases and beta builds, has better UI and visibility from within the add-ons manager. We cannot freely determine the layout and content of that page though, there are the same restrictions as for all other addons.

The page just serves as a reference that can be quickly edited, it does not store the builds at all but rather links to them.

As you can see, each of the sites fulfills a unique need, there is no sensible way we could unite all three locations unless Mozilla leads by making changes for Firefox.

What builds you use is a matter of your stability requirements. Using the central builds might mean there will be a few days where the builds are broken if we break something with a patch. Aurora is more stable, reporting bugs on these builds will help us catch regressions early. If you are a power user or a bit more adventurous, this is ideal. Using the beta builds is much closer to release, it's a lot less likely there will be problems with these builds, there are usually not a lot of changes between beta and release builds. Use this if you are interested in reporting bugs early but don't consider yourself a power user.
Duplicate of this bug: 1150611
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.