Gervase Markham wrote:
> tradervik wrote:
>
>>My two cents on Mozilla 1.0:
>>
>>I think the discussion has prematurely focused more on the details
>>rather than clarifying the
>>big picture. In other words, I think it essential to come up with a
>>succinct "vision statement" defining
>>the general purpose of the 1.0 release. Examples:
>>
>
> True, although I think [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s vision, at any rate, is already
> reasonably clear from documents on www.mozilla.org and what's been said in
> the past - it's about standards support and a stable platform.
It wasn't so clear to me and I suspect it may not be clear to others.
Still, if it is about standards and stability, that makes things pretty
simple.
Standards Support:
Pretty straight forward.
Stability:
Do "talkback" builds submit data if a user closes a browser in a normal
fashion? If not, "talkback" data will not give you an accurate picture
of stability.
> [deletia]
>>"1.0 will be sufficiently stable and functional for people to use as an
>>every day browser, mail and news
>>reader." (0.9.2 is practically there)
>>
>
> That's very fuzzy. People will just jump up and down, point to their
> favourite bug, and say "Well, it's not _my_ every day browser until you
> fix _this_!", and then go off in a huff when we don't.
You could try to make a list of "typical browsing activities" and prioritize
bugs related to those activities. I'm willing to send you my bookmarks. ;-)
tradervik
