On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Tim McNerney wrote:
>>
>> Hear hear. I have the same feelings coming from a standards compliance
>> point of view -- we have thousands of known bugs, certainly enough to keep
>> us busy for a year at least (more, at the current rate). What's the rush?
>
> What is the rush? I've got to say that is about the funniest thing I've
> read in a while. How can anyone describe trying to release version 1.0
> of a project within 3.5 years of starting it as rushing it? Mozilla
> needs to release version 1.0, not for business reasons, but out of sheer
> pain of having a project running years late.
How can something run late if it had no target release date?
The only firm date I've ever heard from mozilla.org for a 1.0 release date
is "when it's ready".
> I think the developers, more than anything, need to reach that light
> at the end of the tunnel which is the culmination of all their hard
> work. If you don't release something at some point when it is "good
> enough", you'll never release it.
We release something twice a day, with higher profile releases every 5
weeks and even higher profile releases every 10 weeks, and commercial
releases every n months. So releasing something is not a problem.
--
Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA /. `- ' ( `--'
+1 650 937 6593 `- , ) - > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________ (.' \) (.' -' __________
