Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

ynuwyytqaw · 2024-08-07 12:49:11

Hi, does anyone know why Thunderbird 128.1 is held back in favour of 115.x? I understand waiting for the first point release, but the one in testing is 115.14, not 128.1. Is there any issue with 128.1?

mpan · 2024-08-07 15:42:44

According to Thunderbid releases lists, 115.14.0 is the most recent release, that is upgradeable from previous Thunderbird versions. There is no newer version.

128.x line is not meant for upgrades — it’s a separate ESR branch. It isn’t going to be an update to the normal non-ESR cycle.

ynuwyytqaw · 2024-08-07 17:33:55

Thank you! Much appreciated!

mib1982 · 2024-08-08 17:21:48

mpan wrote:

128.x line is not meant for upgrades — it’s a separate ESR branch. It isn’t going to be an update to the normal non-ESR cycle.

While I can see that the statement you linked suggests that the 128.x line is not intended for upgrades within the normal cycle, there seems to be some discrepancy.

On two of my Windows machines (yes, I dual boot! ), Thunderbird updated from 115.14.0 directly to 128.0 (whilst checking the "About"-Page). This could be an exception, or there might be another explanation for this behavior.

ynuwyytqaw · 2024-08-19 06:49:49

mpan wrote:

128.x line is not meant for upgrades — it’s a separate ESR branch. It isn’t going to be an update to the normal non-ESR cycle.

I am not sure if the text was updated, but now it says:

Thunderbird version 128.0 is only offered as direct download from thunderbird.net and not as an upgrade from Thunderbird version 115 or earlier.

So, it does not refer to any 128.x, but only to 128.0. A bit curious to see that on the page for the 128.1.0esr release, though.

karthanistyr · 2024-08-28 15:54:39

mpan wrote:

128.x line is not meant for upgrades — it’s a separate ESR branch. It isn’t going to be an update to the normal non-ESR cycle.

This is incorrect, the ESR suffix is a necessary clarification due to the introduction of a new monthly release channel. The existing channel had always been "ESR" in practice albeit lacking the name. Here's the source: https://support.mozilla.org/fr/kb/thund … called-esr

mpan wrote:

According to Thunderbid releases lists, 115.14.0 is the most recent release, that is upgradeable from previous Thunderbird versions. There is no newer version.

At the time of the above posting, people had been receiving autoupdates to 128 for almost a week; autoupdates look to have been activated around late July (as per reporting, e.g. https://www.ghacks.net/2024/07/30/thund … -enabled/). So I see no technical reason not to expect a package upgrade in the arch repos. IIRC, the 115 repo upgrade was also delayed by a few weeks after release.

ynuwyytqaw · 2024-08-28 16:09:48

Thank you, karthanistyr. That is a very useful information.

So, Thunderbird moved to a monthly release schedule and created a new release branch for ESR (Extended Support Release). I guess that Arch Linux should move along and use the thunderbird package for the monthly releases. If people were interested in an ESR release, someone may want to create a new package (thunderbird-esr, for example), but I don't believe there is much interest.

seth · 2024-08-28 16:54:45

people had been receiving autoupdates to 128 for almost a week

And yet, the release notes *explicitly* state:

https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/128.1.1esr/releasenotes/ wrote:

Thunderbird version 128.0 is only offered as direct download from thunderbird.net and not as an upgrade from Thunderbird version 115 or earlier. A future release will provide updates from earlier versions.

So the *official* release notes make it sound that updating from 115 to 128 isn't supported and a future release will be the update from 115 (and there's a 129 version - no esr - in the pipeline) - regardless of whether "people" (how many) have "received" (how exactly) "autoupdates to 128" (from what)?
Do you have any official source suggesting to update from 115 to 128? 'cause I certainly could not blame the package maintainer to be confused about the status quo here.

icar · 2024-08-28 17:00:17

If it matters, https://flathub.org/apps/org.mozilla.Thunderbird -> 128.1.1esr

It's published by Mozilla themselves...

Last edited by icar (2024-08-28 17:00:48)

karthanistyr · 2024-08-28 19:11:24

seth wrote:

people had been receiving autoupdates to 128 for almost a week
And yet, the release notes *explicitly* state:
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/128.1.1esr/releasenotes/ wrote:
Thunderbird version 128.0 is only offered as direct download from thunderbird.net and not as an upgrade from Thunderbird version 115 or earlier. A future release will provide updates from earlier versions.

The release notes appear all but missing an update to this statement, as they specify 128.0 in full, which has not been the latest version for some time now. Others have already pointed out this discrepancy.

seth wrote:

So the *official* release notes make it sound that updating from 115 to 128 isn't supported and a future release will be the update from 115 (and there's a 129 version - no esr - in the pipeline) - regardless of whether "people" (how many) have "received" (how exactly) "autoupdates to 128" (from what)?
Do you have any official source suggesting to update from 115 to 128? 'cause I certainly could not blame the package maintainer to be confused about the status quo here.

I'll forgive your tone, and point you to the bottom of the updated release blog post: https://blog.thunderbird.net/2024/07/we … 28-nebula/

[Updated July 31] Even with QA and beta testing, any major software release may have issues exposed after significant public testing. That’s why we are slowly enabling automatic updates until we’re confident no such issues exist. As of July 29, we have enabled manual upgrade to 128 via Help > About, and some users will begin receiving automatic updates. Thunderbird version 128.0 is also offered as direct download from thunderbird.net. For users running Thunderbird from the snap or flatpak, 128 is also available.

Users I was referring to are those having installed the software with a mozilla provided package, e.g. windows or macos users who receive updates via the in-app mechanism, which is not the way the Arch provided repo package works (requiring an update from the package maintainer).

karthanistyr · 2024-08-28 19:14:35

To be clear, I'm not demanding anything, and certainly not a prompt update from the package maintainer, especially given this is a major version upgrade. I want to make sure we all understand that the 115 to 128 upgrade path is supported and intended by Mozilla, and provide official sources supporting this fact.

Last edited by karthanistyr (2024-08-28 19:15:16)

seth · 2024-08-28 19:59:53

So basically, the most recent update is a month old addendum to a blog post about the "128" (no minor version nor "esr") release that expressed enough concern to justify an opt-in update and a staged rollout ("and some users will begin receiving automatic updates") while the explicit notion that "128.0" is not considered an update to 115 remains in all 128xx release notes and on top of this (when this thread was started) 115.4 and 128.1esr were released the same day - suggesting parallel development.

I guess we can agree that there's at least *some* lack of clarity in the upstream communication?

Sorry if you felt offended, this was really not my intention.
I simply want to get the mush out of the lingo. "People are already getting it, trust me bro!!" doesn't really add much to the unclear upstream communication.

The package has been flagged out of date yesterday, but I'd assume the maintainer might still want some confirmation that this (apparently, I'm not a user) major update will not cause havoc when rolled out to thousands of users at the same time (leading to a lot of "helps! the thunderbird ates my mail!!!" threads) and the remaining status quo (dated) sounds like upstream concerns/reluctance about a mass-rollout (and distros usually cannot stage rollouts)

If things have developed beyond this (notably w/ the 128.1.1esr release from Aug 21st), maintainers of all distros (fedora also still ships 115, ubuntu some snap where I can't make out a version) probably would like to see this being officially communicated and if somebody in this thread is affiliated with the upstream source, they might want to indicate that.
(Though maybe the maintainer/s already contacted upstream to get a private take on this)

Ftr, there's https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/thunderbird-bin (currently 129) and https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/thun … n-noupdate - binaries are provided by upstream.

karthanistyr · 2024-09-03 10:53:55

Thanks for your explanation.

Digging into it a little bit more, it seems the package maintainer is on top of it: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … ote_201690
Mozilla publishing a "latest version" manifest, eventually it'll allow for updating the package. Just a little bit longer now.
Cheers

ynuwyytqaw · 2024-09-10 08:04:17

Thanks! Is there anything else holding back the upgrade? Just curious.

Awebb · 2024-09-10 10:10:46

ynuwyytqaw wrote:

Thanks! Is there anything else holding back the upgrade? Just curious.

While I didn't ask the maintainers, I can only imagine, that they don't want to update to the ESR branch, because of the clusterfuck described in this thread. Thunderbird is not exactly a toy, it's a productive tool used by many people. I'd personally wait for the Thunderbird folks to unfuck themselves before sending all Arch users down an uncertain path.

karthanistyr · 2024-09-13 14:18:24

It looks like the update is coming very soon: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … 159b858e8c

Nikolai5 · 2024-09-13 14:35:14

Version 128 is in extra-testing : https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x8 … underbird/

So if/when it passes testing it will be put live.

You can either wait, or install 128 yourself if you can't wait. For something like Thunderbird, I would just personally wait.

PeerK · 2024-09-14 10:04:20

Hi all,

with the update today morning TB was also updated on my Notebook as discussed in this thread. /var/log/pacman.log states:

[2024-09-14T09:32:29+0200] [ALPM] upgraded thunderbird (115.14.0-1 -> 128.2.0-1)

After restarting TB, the scaling of the application appears to be reduced by ~ 50%, much too small to be usable no more.

Anyone else experiencing the same phenomena or an idea, how to get rid of it? Maybe it is not a bug, but a feature, that I was not aware of

Thank you and kind regards,
Peer

Here some HW/Config - Infos:

inxi -SG
System:
  Host: me5 Kernel: 6.10.9-arch1-2 arch: x86_64 bits: 64
  Desktop: KDE Plasma v: 6.1.5 Distro: Arch Linux
Graphics:
  Device-1: AMD Phoenix3 driver: amdgpu v: kernel
  Device-2: Bison Integrated RGB Camera driver: uvcvideo type: USB
  Display: wayland server: X.org v: 1.21.1.13 with: Xwayland v: 24.1.2
    compositor: kwin_wayland driver: X: loaded: modesetting dri: radeonsi
    gpu: amdgpu resolution: 1829x1143
  API: EGL v: 1.5 drivers: kms_swrast,radeonsi,swrast
    platforms: gbm,wayland,x11,surfaceless,device
  API: OpenGL v: 4.6 compat-v: 4.5 vendor: amd mesa v: 24.2.2-arch1.1
    renderer: AMD Radeon Graphics (radeonsi gfx1103_r1 LLVM 18.1.8 DRM 3.57
    6.10.9-arch1-2)
  API: Vulkan v: 1.3.295 drivers: amd surfaces: xcb,xlib,wayland

seth · 2024-09-14 10:08:54

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/HiDPI but that's off topic for this thread, in doubt open a new one and record you current hidpi config and what you've tried.

PeerK · 2024-09-14 10:16:18

seth wrote:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/HiDPI but that's off topic for this thread, in doubt open a new one and record you current hidpi config and what you've tried.

Thank you, sorry for OT posting, further questions will go to a new thread. I thought it might be related to the reason why 128.1 should be left out.

Arch Linux

#1 2024-08-07 12:49:11

Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#2 2024-08-07 15:42:44

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#3 2024-08-07 17:33:55

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#4 2024-08-08 17:21:48

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#5 2024-08-19 06:49:49

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#6 2024-08-28 15:54:39

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#7 2024-08-28 16:09:48

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#8 2024-08-28 16:54:45

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#9 2024-08-28 17:00:17

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#10 2024-08-28 19:11:24

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#11 2024-08-28 19:14:35

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#12 2024-08-28 19:59:53

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#13 2024-09-03 10:53:55

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#14 2024-09-10 08:04:17

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#15 2024-09-10 10:10:46

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#16 2024-09-13 14:18:24

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#17 2024-09-13 14:35:14

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#18 2024-09-14 10:04:20

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#19 2024-09-14 10:08:54

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

#20 2024-09-14 10:16:18

Re: Thunderbird 128.1 held back?

Board footer