[Project_owners] A MozDev Mission Statement?
ah at numerik.uni-kiel.de
Thu Sep 18 15:03:02 EDT 2003
John Dobbins wrote:
> Before Mozilla 1.0 was released there was some excuse for things being
> unsettled. When you are developing for a platfom that is under
> development itself a moving target can be expected. I Understood that.
> What I didn't understsnd was the lousy communications. It wasn't a case
> of "In Two weeks we will be making some checkins that will cause the
> following problems.....". It was SURPRISE! your application dosen't work
> with today's build! or SURPRISE! That bug fix for Mozilla that you spent
> days working on that is allmost ready is busted! Any work you did over
> the last two weeks was a waste of time.
> Changes prior to 1.0 aren't what made me mad, it was the damn surprises.
> Changes without warning, ones that not only surprised people working on
> outside projects, but also community members who were trying to fix bugs
> in Mozilla itself.
> After Mozilla 1.0 was released point releases shouldn't break
> applications. An application that worked with 1.0 should work with 1.1,
> 1.2, 1.3 etc
How comes that you think you can determine the versioning scheme? Stuff
that is known to work on 1.0 should work on 1.0.1 and so forth.
Hey, if you wanna blast away version numbers, great, let's call it
Don't make assumptions. Read. The relevant roadmap says it all:
Frozen interfaces stay frozen 'til 2.0, with a stable branch with only
> Things that break aplications, because they rely on features that are in
> the 1 series should have been introduced in a new development tree that
> would become Mozilla 2.0. Things like the birds belong in a 2.0 series
> tree that would target a release date about 2 years after 1.0 was released.
The birds are a different UI on a somewhat changed/renamed toolkit. The
version number 2 was, IIRC, always meant to mean substantial backbone
changes. Like, rip out nsIContent, XBL 2, stuff like that. See the roadmap.
> Right now there isn't a stable series of releases that a developer can
> count on being viable for a couple of years.
Silly. There is both 1.0.x and 1.4.x. How stable do you want it?
More information about the Project_owners