The new Firefox Rapid Release process is meant to get new features and improvement out to the hands of users sooner. For example, we had TONS of new features in Firefox 4. However, the development for Firefox 4 took over 18 months. many of those features were finished in the first few months. If we had been using Rapid Release, those new features would have gotten out sooner so people could take advantage of them. While yes, some updates aren't going to be as feature packed as others (Example, Firefox 9 had some nice major improvements, while Firefox 11 was a quiet release), be sticking to a time based schedule all users get benefits as quickly as possible.

http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2011/08/25/rapid-release-process/ explains the process in more detail.

No, is there a specific issue that you are having because of the version number changes? If there is, I'd like to try to help you figure out a way around that problem if you would give me some more details.

Minor updates are reserved to fix (security) issues with the current release.
Development and testing new code and features is done in three subsequent versions (Beta is 12, Aurora is 13, and Nightly is 14), so it isn't possible to name Firefox release versions otherwise.

There hasn't been released a regular Firefox 10.0.3 version, only as an enterprise update a 10.0.3 version was released.

• http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all.html

Thanks for the quick response. My biggest issue is not knowing whether a release is important in the context of some fix or security issue, or merely someone's idea of a new feature that may or may not be needed or necessary. In part, my anxiety comes from the fact that my training and experience tells me that "point" releases fix issues and enhance stability, while new versions start that process all over. Perhaps that is not true anymore, but I have been in the business a long time!

In my previous life as a local government CIO, I would be going insane with the current release schedule, and I can envision that my former colleagues are currently having no end of discussions trying to explain to end-users why they are using Firefox's enterprise ver 10 while at home they have version 11, 12, or whatever every few weeks. When one of those users is the boss, you can imagine how the discussion can go! Admittedly, this previous experience may give me a perspective that is unfair in the context of Firefox's new strategy, but I doubt that I am alone.

My current life is less hectic than that, but I still provide assistance and some degree of support to a variety of users. Even in this more limited context, it can be a challenge to explain what is going on to end users. Moreover, keep in mind that, rightly or wrongly, Firefox has tried to build a reputation on being better, yet more stable and more secure than its main competitors. I'm not sure that message is being maintained well with the constant updates, as the very nature of those changes can suggest a lack of stability in the mind of consumers.

-Danny.

See:

• http://www.mozilla.org/security/
• http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/

I do agree with you, in the older model of things, Point releases were X.0.0 for major releases, 0.X.0 for minor releases, and 0.0.X for security and bug fix releases. However, with the new Rapid Release model, it is time based instead of change based, with the aim of eventually making version number irrelevant. Firefox 13 has silent updates planned (which will make Firefox much more like Chrome in this regard, which updates itself automagically), meaning your typical end-user is less likely to notice they are running a new version.

I like to refer to the new version of Firefox as a train. It leaves the station every X weeks, whether it has 1 passenger or 200. With version numbers slowly becoming less relevant, you can explain to your end users that "The extended support release is so big businesses don't have to be constantly making sure their software works with Firefox" and the regular release is for end-users without the concerns of a big business. Stability isn't proved by the version number, but it is proved by the actual performance of the browser. With Rapid Release, hopefully users can reap the benefits of not having to wait 18 months for an improved spell checker, or a Retained Layer Rendering system like the case was in Firefox 4.

Interesting analogy. However, do you really want to risk falling asleep on the train and finding yourself in Los Angeles instead of Chicago as you planned? Moreover, you've hit the biggest concern exactly on target: ".... constantly making sure their software works with Firefox." I just do not consider that issue to be exclusively a concern of businesses. I certainly do not want to boot up one day and find that Firefox has automatically updated itself and is now causing compatibility issues with some other software on my system, or various Firefox extensions or plugins.

Your comment on Firefox 13 absolutely terrifies me, although I very much appreciate the warning (even if not intended that way). Other than virus definition files, there is no way I will ever allow any software on a system that can update itself without my knowledge.

Come to think of it, I would imagine that a lot of users are going to have real headaches with software that tries to do automatic updates when they have properly configured virus software that is set to protect their existing installations and registry. I will grant that too many users are probably not properly using their antivirus tools and far too many always run in admin mode, but for those that do deal with security correctly any such automatic upgrades should fail.

Software developers have a lot of time to check their software against new Firefox versions (code). At this time Firefox 14 is already being developed (Firefox 12 is in beta 1 state), so if they wait to check if their software needs an update until a new version of Firefox has been released then that is their choice, but it is not very friendly towards users of their software.