Firefox 1.0 is in a few months, and we're missing some pieces to make deployments of the browser really feasible/manageable. Not sure how much of this is also present/needed in Thunderbird either, we can morph this if needed. - autoconfig is currently broken if LDAP isn't built. (bug 240897) - we don't have any support for locked prefs when doing disabling (bug 241526) - we don't have any official documentation/tools for sysadmins to use autoconfig and ben's upcoming extension manager command-line installations (needed for global installations of extensions) (sort of bug 226876, but more specific to the implementation end) - we don't have an MSI package available, especially needed for Active Directory deployments (bug 231062) this is a major blocker for breaking into that space - there's no way of dynamically limiting UI etc post-deployment (i.e. hiding Bookmarks after the fact) since we're effectively limited to using userChrome.css in the defaults/base/chrome directory. Not sure what the best solution to this one is. (global version of userChrome.css? probably needs a spinoff for discussion) Of course, I'm not directly dealing with the people doing deployments, so I'm not sure how critical this is to major customers, but it seems like a major issue in mid-level (100-1000) deployments based on feedback in forums/bugs/IRC. This is something that I feel we can't miss for 1.0 and I'm willing to drive the bus myself on this, but feedback is good as to how important this is perceived to be and what I might be missing.
Sorry bout the spam, added 218944 as a dependant. Important for windows based networks, within Active Directory style rollouts windows proxy settings can be set with one of the supplied adm files.
Chofmann, are you tracking this one? /be
dump to nobody, its a tracker, and I'm not going to have time to do anything much with this.
going to try and get granrose to look at the msi installer, depending on time. ammer might be building docs on autoconfig...
yes, it'd be great if we could look into offering an MSI installer. this is a popular enterprise request AFAIK.
Volunteers are all over the MSI installer: see bug 231062, which I'm marking as a dependency. /be
If we're going to promote MSI-based installs, we need to make sure that our app-update mechanism can gracefully handle the case of an app installed via MSI (including the user not having admin rights), that we can push extensions and XPI-patches via MSI, etc. It'd be awesome to do, though.
I've made a MSI file at http://www.webheat.co.uk/firefox.php that almost does everything an automated install needs to. The only think I can't *easily* get it to do is assign itself as the default browser, the reason for this is that the regkey strings that are checked when firefox starts are checked in a case sensitive fashion. I could put in absolute paths but then if anyone wants to install to a different location the regkey's values will be wrong.
I'm not sure what we're going to get here for 1.0 but based on what shaver mentioned in comment #7, complete and functional msi doesnt seem like it's going to be done by the time we ship 1.0. Maybe we've got a shot at some msi packaged build in bug 231062 and the problem at bug 230462 looks fixed already, but at least a couple of the others have been minused and the documentation bugs don't seem to have gone anywhere. I think this is a small enough group of tasks that we're better served at this point by trying to get specific progress on the depends bugs rather than this metabug.
Firefox is now at v2 and climbing - I think this bug needs re-evaluating...
Just another demonstration of the value of meta bugs...
9 years ago