99994 - releases/ page shows no non-Talkback Linux build

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(www.mozilla.org :: General, defect)

Description

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

Reproduction:
1. Go to <http://www.mozilla.org/releases/>.
2. Try to find a normal (non-Redhat) Linux build without Talkback.

Actual result:
There is a link to
<http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/releases/mozilla0.9.4/mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu-0.9.4.tar.gz>,
which doesn't seem to contain Talkback, but the link text says "talkback enabled
x86 tar.gz format".
Expected result:
There is a build without Tackback for each supported arch and the releases page
also says so.

Rationale:
There are good reasons for not wanting to use Talkback:
1. It is not open-source (and we are an open-source project after all)
2. Talkback, by sending back crash data, might reveal sensitive data. (The
likeliness is very small, but I think it exists. Correct me, if I'm wrong.)

Comment 1

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

The installers allow you to not install the talkback XPI!!! If you use the
Stub/Net installer you don't even have to download the thing! The zipped builds
allow you to delete the talkback executable (or just don't unpack it when you
unpack the rest) before starting Mozilla for the first time. Talkback allows you
to opt out of using it the first time you crash. If you opt in it lets you opt
out for every individual crash report. Nothing is ever sent without the user's
agreement. If people don't think that's good enough then they can use the RPM
builds, Beonex, homebrew builds or they can wait for someone else to do a
distribution that doesn't have talkback. 

Mac and Windows are not open source but I use the hell out of them testing
Mozilla. I uses build tools that aren't open source to build Mozilla. I use font
packs that aren't open source to test mozilla. I use all kinds of proprietary
bits working to make Mozilla a better open source technology. If you don't want
to use proprietary tools to help test Mozilla you don't have to.  Talkback is an
extremely valuable tool and there are a million ways for our Mozilla testers to
opt out of it. I see no reason not to give them the oportunity with every build
to participate in this kind of testing and reporting.  

This should be wontfix. 

Comment 2

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

BTW: Unlike advertized, the 0.9.4 Linux tarball doesn't seem to contain
Talkback. Not sure, if I just missed it or if the webpage or the build is not as
intended.


> The installers allow you to not install the talkback XPI!

The installers don't work in many cases (without bending over backwards and/or
crippling test results), for as example one as simple as installing as root.

> The zipped builds allow you to delete the talkback executable

This assumes that I know exactly which files are those. Is there a readme? Why
should I have to do extra work just to get open-source-only software from an
open-source project?

Open-source projects should promote open-source, not proprietary software like
Talkback. If you want to ask people to run Talkback, this is one thing. Not
giving them the option to ignore that request is another one.

> Talkback allows you
> to opt out of using it the first time you crash. If you opt in it lets you
> opt out for every individual crash report.

This *might* take care of the security concern, but not the open-source one.

> If people don't think that's good enough then they can use the RPM
> builds, Beonex, homebrew builds

So, are you saying that for getting open-source test builds of an open-source
project, people have to rely on third parties?

(BTW: Testing builds are not the subject of Beonex, but enduser builds. Redhat
packages don't work well on non-Redhat systems.)

> If you don't want to use proprietary tools to help test Mozilla you don't
> have to.

Wrong, which is exactly the subject of this bug.

Comment 3

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

Whatever. If you don't want to use Talkback you don't have to. It is possible to
use any of the available builds without using Talkback.

>So, are you saying that for getting open-source test builds of an open-source
project, people have to rely on third parties?

There is no reliance on Talkback. It is easily avoided in the Installers or
deleted in the tarballs. Testers do not have to use Talkback. They do not have
to rely on talkback. If they care that much about avoiding even the sight of a
proprietary app (this is plain silly) then they can use a nightly build or they
can build themselves, both preferred testing choices.
 

Comment 4

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

> It is possible to use any of the available builds without using Talkback.

It might be possible, but the occasional tester might not even be aware, that
Talkback is a proprietary app, and even less so, if and how he can remove it. If
I were such a tester, from "Talkback-enabled build", I would assume that
Talkback is somehow compiled in and cannot be removed.

I do think that there is a considerable amount of people who care about
proprietary vs. open-source.

> If they care that much about avoiding even the sight of a
> proprietary app (this is plain silly)

Please do not call a valid world-view "silly". In fact, this attitude is the
reason, why we have lots of open-source apps at all.

> then they can use a nightly build or they
> can build themselves, both preferred testing choices.

If that were an option, why do you have release builds at all?

Comment 5

[Asa Dotzler [:asa]]

>> then they can use a nightly build or they
>> can build themselves, both preferred testing choices.

>If that were an option, why do you have release builds at all?

all binaries posted to ftp.mozilla.org are "release" builds. This includes
nightly, experimental and Milestone builds. "Release" is a set of build flags, I
think optimized and debug symbols stripped. We provide all of these builds for
testing and development purposes. 

>I do think that there is a considerable amount of people who care about
>proprietary vs. open-source

I agree. I don't think there are many people that care about proprietary code
that helps degub open-source code. Those that do care enough about avoiding
proprietary code can compile themselves, use an installer build and not even
download the talkback component, use the sea installer or the tarball and delete
the talkback executable before starting the app, or opt out of talkback the
first time it pops up. 

Comment 6

[James Cox]

-> taking QA contact so I don't need to watch Dawn anymore. ;)

Comment 7

[Bryce Mozilla Nesbitt]

I WANT talkback, and each time I try to download the talkback enabled build.

But talkback never comes up.  Please check the builds to ensure talkback is
really there for Linux!

Comment 8

[hacker formerly known as [e-mail]]

The Mozilla 1.3 release notes contain links for both the installer-sea talkback
tarball and the non-talkback tarball.