Ben Tremblay wrote: > Fulvio Perini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > >>Mozilla0.9.6 seemed on its way to something,but things went downhill after >>that. Please,tell me that I am wrong. >>Thanks. >> > To echo someone else's succinct reply, you're wrong. But that misses > the point ... the expectation of linear progress is *sigh* not > appreciative of how regressions come about. We don't sit around in > circles testing our faith by supplicating the deities of software, > manifesting our virtue by appealing to the gods for effective patches > ... it doesn't work like that. > > If you want a sense of what's entailed in the development cycle, why > doncha hike over and crawl the material at mozilla.org ... this isn't > a commerical product where you're getting intentionally incremental > releases *glares in the general direction of Redmond* ... these are > snapshots of a development cycle that is, politics aside, always > wheels within wheels. This project is _paradigmatic_ of "herding > cats", and in a good number of cases _new breeds_ of cats (who'd uh > thunk that XUL rhymes with "zool"?!) Which isn't to intimate that it's > a paradigm of good process, just that's it's an awesome project and > IMHO a really whack vision. > > Grunting from effort is a very nice alternative to groaning with > disatisfaction. (Besides which, I doubt that there's another > opportunity for Joe Public to crawl around on the inside watching how > this stuff is actually produced!) > > totally freakin' amazing ... and OpenSource to boot! > > hfx_ben >
I sure wish Sky-pilot was available. that was one hell of a skin for mozilla!!! Wabbit
