On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Andreas Franke wrote:
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
> Ok, then please explain to me how it could happen that when
> Netscape 6.0 was released, mozilla 1.0 was promised for/targeted at
> the end of Q2 2001.
Where did you get that information?
> Does this mean that the engineers have worked hard to introduce more
> bugs so that there are twice as many bugs now? Or is the discovery
> rate of existing bugs several times higher than the bug fix rate?
The rate of discovery is indeed higher than the fix rate. However, that
isn't the reason the release date was pushed back, since, as far as I am
aware, no release date has ever been given beyond "when it's ready" and
"if we're lucky, we may be ready around then".
> The point is that if there is going to be at least another year before
> the mozilla 1.0 release, then it's simply stupid to refuse any new
> features from now on, because not everyone can fix standards
> compliance bugs. (Of course, it would be nice if more people were
> helping with them.)
Standards compliance bugs are by no means the only problem we have.
Crashes, performance, horrible UI, polish bugs, fundamental problems with
features such as skin switching, preferences, bookmarks, wallet and so on
are all important bugs that need work.
Yes, I do think we should ramp down the feature work. The more features we
have, the more bugs we have, the further away 1.0 is.
--
Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA /. `- ' ( `--'
+1 650 937 6593 `- , ) - > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________ (.' \) (.' -' __________
