Join GitHub today
Web client doesn't load in Firefox ESR 45.8.x #6428
Web client fails to load in Firefox ESR (45.8.x) when connecting to self-hosted mattermost server
Steps to reproduce
Open the web client in a Firefox ESR (45.8.x)
Web client loads.
As I understand it, Firefox ESR is a desktop app version of Firefox for large corporations?
Could you explain a little more about your set-up as I'm wondering whether some settings within the Firefox ESR set-up are blocking Mattermost from loading.
Debian 8 (current stable) comes with Iceweasel (rebranded for trademark reasons) which is a Firefox ESR and with a newer package called firefox-esr. The reason for the co-existence is that they are transitioning away from the rebranded thing, but that's not relevant for this issue.
I'm running Debian Stretch (that's the upcoming stable, release is soon to come). I don't have any plugins active. Our company (where my workstation is running) has no filtering forward proxy whatsoever. The TLS certificate that our self-hosted Mattermost uses is issued by Let's Encrypt.
If you need more information feel free to ask.
(Same here - migrated to 3.9 and it breaks on my FF on Debian stable)
That's pretty lame IMHO. Why not fix the thing that introduced problem in the first place instead? Mattermost is now apparently broken on all systems running ESR 45. How do you know when/if those platforms will (be able to) upgrade?
At some point you need to limit the platforms/versions you support and I find it legitimate to not waste effort on supporting versions that are officially (EOL) not maintained anymore. In addition, if your company decides its chat solution is Mattermost, why not install the (well tested) standalone client then?
Because: if you want to use github, why not use their standalone client too (that is in fact a complete webbrowser + pixie dust)? And if you want to access nyt.com as well, then why not use their standalone client also? And slashdot. And gitlab. And stackoverflow. And redmine. And ... People's machines have only so much RAM. Maybe they'd like it to run applications that in fact really are different applications (say a compiler) or use their RAM for data (editing an image maybe?), instead of running N instances of the same application. I can see you point, but I think the path you're suggesting is a path of ressource and energy waste, which I'd rather not perpetuate.