Web functionality; was Re: Debian release criteria.
David & all,
Earlier from peter,
> > Bulk of the software and frequent updates are evident but what changes
> > in functionality? The Web site of my credit union works as it did
> > five years ago.
From: David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2023 21:46:39 -0600
> What's that got to do with Firefox? OK, it's good that the CU hasn't
> run with every fad that some web developers seem to want, so that
> they get what I call a high "coo-rating". (Coo, look at that.)
Yes, good that the CU Web site is relatively stable. That was a
secondary point.
My primary interest: if many Web sites appear and perform as five
years ago, what is the need for the frequent updates? A bug needs
repair a.s.a.p. A bug compromising security needs repair sooner.
Are most Firefox updates security critical?
Bigger software has more opportunities for security compromise. A
genuine interest in security should motivate a lean browser for
security critical purposes. I'd prefer to access the CU with Dillo.
Unfortunately it gets ... no response. =8~/
> Sure, [Wikipedia pages] tend to be no more complex than required for
> what's being displayed. I assume that's their policy, very sensible.
Wikimedia and Debian get gold stars for keeping their Web sites "in
house". They don't invoke background access to 3rd party pages far and
wide. The policy deserves acknowledgement.
Thx, ... P.
-
mobile: +1 778 951 5147
VoIP: +1 604 670 0140
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:PeterEasthope
Reply to: