User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:5.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/5.0.1 Build ID: 20110707182747 Steps to reproduce: Checked for updates Actual results: No updates were found and they should have been even if only change was to version number. Expected results: The following should have been listed on this page: http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox.html • [b]v5.0.1 is identical to v5.0 on Windows and Linux in all but version number. It was released to keep version numbers the same across platforms.[/b] • Worked around an issue in Mac OS X 10.7 that could cause Firefox to crash • Worked around an issue caused by Apple's "Java for Mac OS X 10.6 Update 5" where the Java plugin would not be loaded And update should have updated Firefox version number to 5.0.1 even if that is the only change made. Millions of users are confused when they see a new version number with no explanation on the official 'Fixed' page. One sentence explanation and updating the version number even if that is the only change made removes this confusion. *Please* consider doing this.
The suggestion of this bug should be generalized: # If minor versions are published as architecture specific, the version numbers should also be updated in installations on unaffected architectures. Despite the NULL update on unaffected architectures this simple mechanism would avoid any confusion. Some details on the 5.0.1 example: - The general release notes indicate changes only for Mac, but give no indication of whether users from other architectures will see the update or not. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/5.0.1/releasenotes/ - Only a blog provides clarity: "This update will only affect users of OSX. Windows and Linux users should not see any updates." http://blog.mozilla.com/products/2011/07/08/firefox-5-minor-update-for-mac-coming-soon/ - Separate directories on FTP are created for unaffected architectures: http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/5.0.1/ - The official download page offers 5.0.1 for all architectures: http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/5.0.1/ Hence, the picture is inconsistent. A user should not be left feeling insecure about the current state, nor should the user be required to investigate a non-issue. Side note: bug 670926 (already marked INVALID) results from this confusion but is in essence and description less general.
Correction for link: - The official download page offers 5.0.1 for all architectures: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html
This is no Firefox product bug and I don't understand why you want a null change delivered to all our users. Our user will not understand such a useless update.
This was a call made by release-drivers and product managers. A bug is not the best place to discuss this, please take it to a newsgroup or forum.
You are correct that this is not a technical bug but please consider that it may be an "issue" that damages the Mozilla brand. Not presenting Mozilla Firefox as a professional product is a bug by marketing, not technical definitions. Official FIX page should have at least a one sentence explanation for *every* official release. http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox.html When user chooses to click to update, they should get one, or else they wonder why it exists on the download page and nothing happens when they click. Then they call and question system builders about things like this and in turn system builders replace products with alternatives rather than have to deal with numerous phone calls. Therefore this is by definition a marketing bug, but a bug nonetheless. v5.0.1 doesn't have to be mass delivered, but why not have the 'useless' changes listed on the official page and have the 'useless' number change switched when users choose to click on 'Check for Updates'?
Please do not continue arguments in this bug, the people who made the decision are _not_ paying attention to this. There is already at least one newsgroup thread on this subject (http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse_thread/thread/5e6044f325b34856#), please use it or start a new one. Continuing to post here is guaranteed to have no effect.