In article <a6alvk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bamm Gabriana wrote: >> I agree when it is released in 2003. > > The delayed release of 0.9.9 will not delay the release of 1.0 > because 0.9.9 is on a branch while 1.0 is on the trunk. The > code for each is being worked on separately.
well yes, but there still needs to be something of a gap between the release of 0.9.9 and the freeze for 1.0, otherwise there's not much point in having 0.9.9. you need time for people to use 0.9.9 so you can get the feedback and use it to improve 1.0. according to schedule, the freeze for 1.0 is less than 3 weeks away. > I personally don't mind delaying the release of 1.0 for a few > weeks. In particular, I don't want 1.0 to be released until > the annoying minimize-restore issue has been settled. that's certainly an annoying one. i'm worried about the fact that view source is broken (40867/55583) and seems to need big changes - i do hope that doesn't slip past 1.0 > It's a two sided coin: we all want it to be out soon otherwise > IE will dominate even more. But it will defeat the purpose if > we hurry up to release something that is, in my opinion, > something that is not yet quite ready for the market. i've never been able to take statements like this very seriously... mozilla isn't going to "the market" - netscape 6.x is what goes to market, and in that sense, mozilla 0.6 (iirc), 0.9.1 and other old (rather lame) versions have already "gone to market" if you're worried about netscape vs IE, then it's too late to worry about release something not ready for market - netscape 6 was out 16 months ago and, not to put too fine a point on it, it sucked rocks... in terms of the netscape market, mozilla 1.0 is going to be a point upgrade (i believe) -- michael
