And it came to pass that JTK wrote:
>jesus X wrote:
>>
>> JTK wrote:
>> > DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>> > > It's already usable. In fact, more usable than IE 6's
>> > > beta progress is
>> > Gimme that Olde Tyme religion...
>>
>> Or maybe it's opinion. Ever think of that?
>
>No.
>
>> I for one use Mozilla exclusively as
>> a browser now, it's so stable.
>
>Well I'd hope so, as slow as it is. And the insane amount of
>memory it hogs.
>
>> What you may not understand is that 0.9.1 was an
>> extraordinarily stable release,
>
>Compared to previous releases? Heheheyeah, I'd sure hope so.
>
>> and to extend this, the choice had been made to
>> extend the time in which the tree is closed to non-approved
>> checkins for an additional 2 weeks, at the end of which
>> would be released 0.9.2, which is going to be the
>> "stability" release.
>>
>> This will be an extremely stable (near commercial quality,
>> if not equal to) release to show the progress that has been
>> made.
>
>Huh? "To show the progress that has been made"?!? I thought
>that was why 6.0 was released.
>
>> The hope is that the primary
>> differentiation between 0.9.2 and 1.0 will be that 0.9.2
>> won't have quite as many fixes and some features will still
>> be incomplete, but stability will be nearly the same high
>> level.
>>
>> Netscape took the 0.9.1 branch, made NS6.1PR1, and it's
>> been getting stunning reviews for a beta.
>
>About two years too late, even if true. Who's reviewed
>NS6.1? I've not read a single review yet (other than from
>the Faithful). The world has forgotten about Netscape,
>rabbi.
>
>> Yes, NS6 sucked, we all know that. But I think you need to
>> take a fresh look at where things are.
>>
>
>I do that pretty much every day. And when I do so, I'm
>loudly accused of being a "hypocrite" by certain religious
>factions of the Body.
>
Nah - most of us simply think you're a jerk.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
I live like this 'cuz I like it; I've seen too much to pretend
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
