Slashdot Mirror

Where should one go to keep track of what features and what bugs are in a particular build?

Mozillazine build bar talkback,
Mozillanews build votes, or cc yourself on specific bugs in Bugzilla to find out when they're fixed.

Also, where is this "wild-west" repository? I don't see anything like that in http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/

nightly/latest-trunk

With the upcoming release of Mozilla 1.0, Netscape 7 will be based on that. I really hope reviewers, developers and users will take a new view on Netscape so Netscape can gain some of the lost market share. I'm tired of seeing websites which simply don't care about Netscape/Mozilla support...

And don't start saying "hey, I don't need Netscape, I want plain Mozilla!". You're right, but Netscape is for (l)users. If Netscape 7 has success, you'll also have more luck surfing the internet with your Mozilla browser.

By the way, MozillaZine is also a great source of information for Mozilla-fans.

There will be an RC3, and I hope there's an RC4 as well. Better a good product, than one pushed out the door too quickly. As for bugs, there is no chance that most of the new bugs will be fixed by 1.0. Only important bugs or bugs with trivial fixes are getting fixed in the 1.0 branch now.

Here are my thoughts:

By now I am sure most people have seen that Mozilla RC1 has been released .
The press has picked this up and now there are a number of reviews .



They all fail to compare RC1 to the last release (0.99) which leads to almost
all positive feedback.


The truth is that Mozilla really screwed up their release process. This is the
worst stable Mozilla build I have tested in the last year. They litterally
broke every rule in the book:


- They introduced major UI changes which are incompatible with all of the builds
since 0.80 or so.


- Saving files locally (at least on my system) is totally broken. Want to save
a PDF file locally? ... Too bad!


- They have completely changed around a lot of the preferences. Where did
these come from?


There are also numerous other small bugs.


RC1 should have been 0.99 with *only* patches to fix critical bugs. How many
release candidates do they expect to have?


Will there every be a Mozilla 1.0 or is it just going to be asymptotic to 1.0?

Try MozillaZine for information on nightlies, and daily status updates. Or, you could add the MozillaZine Slashbox to your homepage.

Chimera is, according to these tests, the fastest MacOS Web browser by a factor of 2.

Chimera is, of course, based on Gecko, the Mozilla rendering engine. It's mainly the work of Mozilla uber-hacker Dave Hyatt.

Gerv

Why does mozillaZine.org feature the launching of the Hindenburg? Is there some deeper message here?

People more than ever need to go out there and download , test, and give bug reports.

I agree with your point, but why link to old builds? Asa says the -03-26 (linux and mac) and -03-27 (win32) builds are very good.

Don't just report bugs! Join the QA effort and help triage the bug reports!

Christopher

While you're waiting, try the Tree Status and the Roadmap.

From these links, you can tell that 1.0 is scheduled for release in about 2 weeks, but from the current Tree status it looks like that might not be a realistic time frame...more like 4 weeks...

When MozillaZine is back up, make sure to check out the newest Build Comments...there's been alot of fixes recently...

AOL has now actually begun testing the use of Mozilla (Gecko to be specific) as part of its software. There are articles on this at http://news.com.com/2100-1023-860710.html and http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=2 169.

What really sucks is that the lead developer of Multizilla has been gone and the newer builds of Mozilla have broken the plugin.

For those that don't know, the incomplete Tabbed Browser feature of Mozilla was copied from Multizilla...as a matter of fact, some code from Multizilla has actually made it into Mozilla...

When Mozilla hasn't broken its functionality, Multizilla is a much better interface than Mozilla's tabbed browser. Many of the features that are buggy or incomplete in Mozilla's implementation are working and have been enhanced in Multizilla.

But not to fear, we should start to see alot more reliability with the 1.0 release...

For mozilla news, I generally read Mozillazine, the major mozilla news site, as well as Mozillanews, a somewhat more community-driven site. For downloads, try XULPlanet, which has a good collection of themes and a good tutorial, and Mozdev (I usually follow projects like Optimoz- gestures- and Googlebar, a mozilla Google Toolbar. Most community development projects wind up here.) Mozillaquest is reserved for cheap laughs, though they have a few article templates to choose from....

Exactly. If you want real news about the development of mozilla, check out Mozillazine

They keep you up to date on the status of nightly builds, rate them for you, and even have a build-bar talkback area so you can chime in on what works/doesn't work. It's the first place I go before I download a nightly.

It would be nice if browsers included an option for reversing that behavior though. . . .

Poof!! Your wish has been granted.

And as for sites that "disable" right clicks, I immediately turn off javascript so I can open links in separate tabs. Wish these people would get a clue.

For the link-impaired, Mozillazine tracks the progress on Mozilla and, for each nightly, gives comments on the day's build. Of course, using the nightlies can be bleeding edge, but the Build Comments can help to ensure smooth sailing.

For the link-impaired, Mozillazine tracks the progress on Mozilla and, for each nightly, gives comments on the day's build. Of course, using the nightlies can be bleeding edge, but the Build Comments can help to ensure smooth sailing.

For the link-impaired, Mozillazine tracks the progress on Mozilla and, for each nightly, gives comments on the day's build. Of course, using the nightlies can be bleeding edge, but the Build Comments can help to ensure smooth sailing.

I believe 0.9.8 is due out tomorrow.
Well, as 0.9.8 branched only yesterday, i'd reather think 0.9.8 will be out som time early next week, and mozillazine seems to say the same ;-)
FYI, pre-0.9.8 builds are already available.

Yea, the tree closed for 0.9.8 like a week ago. Tree Closes for 0.9.8. For those that don't want to click the link, here's what it says...

...0.9.8 will have a variety of new items including new natively drawn widgets on WindowsXP, Mac OS X, and GTK, when you are in the classic skin (We will have more on this later, including screenshots)...

If you're really interested in what's going on with the project, try the latest Build Comments

Yesterday was the last of the frozen trunk builds. And if that's not enough, the Tree Is Opened for 0.9.9 checkins.

And there's now a Mozilla 1.0 Manifesto that lays down precisely what Mozilla 1.0 should be (which will come right after 0.9.9).

Of course, it's nice to see a change in SlashDot change its view of the project. But, then again, maybe I was right all along. :)

Yea, the tree closed for 0.9.8 like a week ago. Tree Closes for 0.9.8. For those that don't want to click the link, here's what it says...

...0.9.8 will have a variety of new items including new natively drawn widgets on WindowsXP, Mac OS X, and GTK, when you are in the classic skin (We will have more on this later, including screenshots)...

If you're really interested in what's going on with the project, try the latest Build Comments

Yesterday was the last of the frozen trunk builds. And if that's not enough, the Tree Is Opened for 0.9.9 checkins.

And there's now a Mozilla 1.0 Manifesto that lays down precisely what Mozilla 1.0 should be (which will come right after 0.9.9).

Of course, it's nice to see a change in SlashDot change its view of the project. But, then again, maybe I was right all along. :)

Yea, the tree closed for 0.9.8 like a week ago. Tree Closes for 0.9.8. For those that don't want to click the link, here's what it says...

...0.9.8 will have a variety of new items including new natively drawn widgets on WindowsXP, Mac OS X, and GTK, when you are in the classic skin (We will have more on this later, including screenshots)...

If you're really interested in what's going on with the project, try the latest Build Comments

Yesterday was the last of the frozen trunk builds. And if that's not enough, the Tree Is Opened for 0.9.9 checkins.

And there's now a Mozilla 1.0 Manifesto that lays down precisely what Mozilla 1.0 should be (which will come right after 0.9.9).

Of course, it's nice to see a change in SlashDot change its view of the project. But, then again, maybe I was right all along. :)

A whole bunch of pages that say if( !navigator ) { doSomeReallyCoolDHTMLStuff(); } Even though netscape 6.2 can do most of them.

These are the sites that need evangelizing to. Learn about Mozilla Evangelism, get a recent Mozilla build (mozillaZine reviewed builds are a middle ground between milestones and the latest nightly), and then begin filing bugs in Bugzilla's Tech Evangelism product.

but the DOM better be the same.

Repeat after me: "document.all" is not part of the HTML DOM.

According to the nightly build comments for Nov 20, there is a new theme page. If you check out the MozillaZine build comments here, you'll see the mention and the bugzilla bug number...

Note that I have not actually tried this myself... I'm just happy that other stuff is working as well as it is at this point with the nightly build from last thursday or so.

Yep, mozilla builds since 20011102 have had some nasty form bugs - they make posting to slashdot quite interesting - take a look at mozillazine's build bar comments for details. Hmm, it looks like the bugs were supposed to be fixed for today's builds. Strange that you're still seeing them. For now I'm sticking with 20011030.

Milestones and nightlies also have far more bugs.

Well, not really.. After all, bugs are being fixed all the time, resulting in a constant net reduction in the bug-count.

Perhaps what you're referring to are the occasional annoying bugs that creep into the nightly builds from time to time (such as session history being broken, which is now fixed, btw). But, don't let that scare you away from the nightlies. Simply check out the Build Comments at Mozillazine. Every day, the nightlies are rated with a simple "thumbs-up" or "thumbs-down". So, if you're concerned about running into weirdness, just avoid the "thumbs-down" builds :).

Milestones and nightlies also have far more bugs.

Well, not really.. After all, bugs are being fixed all the time, resulting in a constant net reduction in the bug-count.

Perhaps what you're referring to are the occasional annoying bugs that creep into the nightly builds from time to time (such as session history being broken, which is now fixed, btw). But, don't let that scare you away from the nightlies. Simply check out the Build Comments at Mozillazine. Every day, the nightlies are rated with a simple "thumbs-up" or "thumbs-down". So, if you're concerned about running into weirdness, just avoid the "thumbs-down" builds :).

For those who do Mozilla builds pretty often, you can sometimes avoid a really bad crasher build by checking out the Build Comments page. Saved me from a couple bad builds, I use nightlies most days that it doens't give me a "thumbs down".

MozillaZine.org has a pointer to a news.com piece too plus additional comments.

Mozillazine is somewhat better but is something of a house organ and doesn't tend to report the negatives.

A more neutral site is Mozillanews which seems to have reasonably accurate information but not as much of it.

There is also of course the "official" Mozilla site which does have some information as well.

Every time there is a mozilla-article posted on Slashdot, it is from MozillaQuest. This site is just pure trash, and should be treated as such. Editors: Please stop approving stories from MozillaQuest. MozillaZine postet this last week.
Repeat after me, "MozillaQuest has no journalistic value whatsoever, and should be ignored".

Why the heck does /. keep posting stories at this site? MozillaQuest's content can be summed up as 1/3 FUD, 1/3 idiocy, and 1/3 plagiarism. At best it can can termed a "wannabe" site, and I'm more inclined simply to label it a travesty.

This story was originally posted at MozillaZine on Thursday. For anybody who visits MozillaZine or who has the Mozilla Sidebar turned on in their /. preferences, this is both a bad joke and stale news. Get with it, /. editors! There's just no excuse for this kind of sloppiness.

Don't give this poseur any more hits! Please!

The Patch Maker story ran in mozillaZine on Sept 27 -- quite a long time ago and there was quite a lot of discussion there, why couldn't slashdot have posted that link then?

I suggest if you want to follow Mozilla news, go to mozillaZine and along the right-hand navigation click on the "Add Sidebar Panel" item (I'd make a link here but it needs more than a URL to make it go). Or go to one of the newsgroups, or watch the top items on Bugzilla (a great source for what's on the developer's mind). There's also This RDF newsfeed for top newsgroup threads. Am I making my point? Don't waste your time at mozillaquest, go to the real deal.

exibit A:
The impetus for creating Patch Maker seems to lie in the fact that Mozilla bugs are raging out of control.

Mozquest is a load of shit, wht's this guy's motivation with giving bad information about the Mozilla project? is it personal? is there some kind of corporate interest involved? Patchmaker is a great project and should make things easier for developing Mozilla UI. how abolut this link to the project itself:

patchmaker page
or the discussion on mozilla zine site

MozillaZine had this story a week earlier than MozillaQuest. MozillaZine is also closer to the Mozilla developer community and has better understanding of what is going on. Please for once go to a respectable Mozilla news site for infomation on the project.

New and apparently buggy features landing at this point leads one to believe that going 1.0 is not high on their priority list.

It seems that many people involved with the project do not even understand that there is a basic conflict between adding new features and getting to 1.0. See this MozillaZine discussion, in which the whole idea of feature freeze is pooh-poohed.

But, considering the current tech economy, trying to push back the inevitable layoff announcements by a few months isn't the worst idea. If anyone has a more rational explaination, go for it.

You know what they say about never explaining something by malice when stupidity would suffice?

Lee Strauss

It's interesting because I was just reading a very similar conversation earlier today at mozillazine.org about Mozilla's new (optional) multi-tabbed interface. Personally, I like having multiple windows within an application but obviously a lot of people don't. In general, it should probably be an optional thing but I know that I will miss the feature in StarOffice.

It's interesting because I was just reading a very similar conversation earlier today at mozillazine.org about Mozilla's new (optional) multi-tabbed interface. Personally, I like having multiple windows within an application but obviously a lot of people don't. In general, it should probably be an optional thing but I know that I will miss the feature in StarOffice.

All of this stuff was discussed a year or two ago on MozillaZine. The intellectual property issues were flagged and pooh-poohed, the impossibility of matching the Aqua widgets and behavior with XUL was discussed, and the problems with ignoring the native widgets in favor of a custom widget set were argued endlessly.

None of the custom-widget defenders could find any particular examples of required CSS behaviors that couldn't be done with native widgets. In fact the people who were claiming there were problems of this type seemed very ignorant of the graphics layer capabilities in MacOS (9 and X) and in Windows as well.

The fact is Mozilla went down the wrong path, a bunch of us tried to get them to reconsider, and they just wouldn't budge.

So surprise, everything we predicted has now come to pass.

Sigh

from my report to mozillazine.org:

The recent posting to slashdot about Bugzilla's 100,000th report begs the question, "what other numbers can you give me?" Here are a few of the numbers I pulled out of the database last night. These numbers are all a little rough but should help make the picture a little more clear. About 18.7% of the reports in Bugzilla are still open (UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, and REOPENED) issues. About 32.8% of the reports have the FIXED Resolution. About 45.4% of the reports in the system are WORKSFORME, INVALID or DUPLICATE. To break that last number down a little more, 26.3% of the database is Resolved as DUPLICATE, 12% WORKSFORME and 7.5% INVALID. About 5.5% of reports in the system are reported against something other than the Mozilla application suite.

So just in case anyone missed it in the fine print, Bugzilla has 100,000+ reports but the Mozilla community has already resolved about 82,000 of those reports. It's probably also useful to know that there are over 32,000 Buzilla user accounts. You can find more on the Mozilla QA and testing community at my O'Reilly OSS Convention presentation (you'll want to use a browser that supports the latest web standards.)

My guess would be RedHat, although that is pure conjecture on my part. I remember somebody from RedHat stating not too long ago that they are planning of replacing Netscape with Mozilla in their Linux distribution at some point and RedHat Linux 7.2 is just around the corner. Mozilla surpasses Navigator 4.x on Linux in just about all respects at this point, so I wouldn't be surprised if RedHat made the switch now rather than waiting for Mozilla 1.0.

There are some good (and probably better informed) guesses at the Mozillazine article on the subject. So far, the other guesses are OEone and Netscape (yes, there's a good explanation for Netscape being the masked vendor even though they just released Navigator 6.1 - read the comments below the article).

Didn't you learn from the last time? Using MozillaQuest as a news source is like using the National Enquirer. If you dig deep enough you might find a kernel of truth, but most of it is sensationalist, wildly inaccurate crap. This is the site that claimed Netscape 6.1 was not based on Mozilla code, includes things like duplicates and feature requests when counting the number of "bugs," and somehow manages to skew every bit of news, whether positive or negative, to make it evidence of Mozilla's demise/irrelevance/uselessness/etc.

If you want straight-forward news (including the real story about Mitchell Baker), check out MozillaZine instead. They may not update the site as frequently, but it's generally news from people who are actually involved with the project, and it's a hell of a lot more accurate (one advantage of waiting until you have real information instead of making up your own).

When Mozilla is finished with the branch it is likely that a major vendor will take over and maintain that branch working toward a commercial release.

Does anybody have any clues as to who this mysterious major vendor is? It's pretty obvious that the insiders at Mozilla.org are under NDA or something like that.

The timing of this makes me wonder if maybe Mitchell isn't going to some other Mozilla related company. Even if not, I think it's interesting that the "commercial" Mozilla community is growing beyond just AOL. It makes for a healthier project.

Does anyone have the scoop as to why Mike Angelo hates Mozilla so much? Was a contribution burned? Did they decide to use someone else's ideas instead of his? Is he just having a permanent "that-time-of-the-month"?

I ask this because he is not forthcoming on his own information. That, and his site is very, very misleading. Do not be fooled the "we asked" or "we investigated" lines. This is the pursuit of one person.

Also, almost all of this individual's "articles" are taken from the Bugzilla entries and Mozilla mainsite postings. They have little foundation in actual fact.

Now, I myself am not involved in the day-to-day of Mozilla and Netscape, but I follow the direction of this project closely, since the technologies being developed here (mainly XUL and XPCOM) can have a dramatic effect on the future of my employers (sorry, I cannot go into much detail here). I keep updated from the mailing lists, and from MozillaZine and The lizard farm.

I very rarely ever head over to MozillaQuest. The reason: most of the "articles" are factually incorrect. take for instance the article on "Mozilla 0.9.2.1 released". If all you ever do is read MozillaQuest, you'd think there was this tremendous conspiracy going on between Mozilla and Netscape. But a quick perusal of Mozilla and/or MozillaZine shed actual light on the subject: The 0.9.2.1 release is 95-99% equivalent to Netscape 6.1, and is being provided for developers to test and debug their XUL/XPCOM/Plug-ins/skins/etc.. against for Netscape 6.1 compatibility.

MozillaQuest is fiction, with enough truth to make it sound legitimate. If you want the real scoop, head over to MozillaZine. Don't waste time at MozillaQuest.

Does anyone have the scoop as to why Mike Angelo hates Mozilla so much? Was a contribution burned? Did they decide to use someone else's ideas instead of his? Is he just having a permanent "that-time-of-the-month"?

I ask this because he is not forthcoming on his own information. That, and his site is very, very misleading. Do not be fooled the "we asked" or "we investigated" lines. This is the pursuit of one person.

Also, almost all of this individual's "articles" are taken from the Bugzilla entries and Mozilla mainsite postings. They have little foundation in actual fact.

Now, I myself am not involved in the day-to-day of Mozilla and Netscape, but I follow the direction of this project closely, since the technologies being developed here (mainly XUL and XPCOM) can have a dramatic effect on the future of my employers (sorry, I cannot go into much detail here). I keep updated from the mailing lists, and from MozillaZine and The lizard farm.

I very rarely ever head over to MozillaQuest. The reason: most of the "articles" are factually incorrect. take for instance the article on "Mozilla 0.9.2.1 released". If all you ever do is read MozillaQuest, you'd think there was this tremendous conspiracy going on between Mozilla and Netscape. But a quick perusal of Mozilla and/or MozillaZine shed actual light on the subject: The 0.9.2.1 release is 95-99% equivalent to Netscape 6.1, and is being provided for developers to test and debug their XUL/XPCOM/Plug-ins/skins/etc.. against for Netscape 6.1 compatibility.

MozillaQuest is fiction, with enough truth to make it sound legitimate. If you want the real scoop, head over to MozillaZine. Don't waste time at MozillaQuest.

Some karma whoring..

From an Asa article at mozillazine.org: " Mitchell Baker's post on her current situation involving Netscape and mozilla.org"

To all the mozilla people: continue the great work, all you rock!

Best regards

Uriel

Mozillaquest has been the source of more disinformation and negative Mozilla and open source spin than I've read anywhere.

For some reason, Mozillazine (the real advocacy site) never gets any /. attention, but Mozillaquest's uninformed and negative stories are always referenced here.

Notice that the article itself is merely reporting rumors.

If you want real mozilla news, check out Mozillazine.

MozillaquestQuest is pretty funny though.

Mozillazine has information about it here. MozillaQuest is and has been unreliable. See MozillaQuestQuest for more information.

Mozillazine has information about it here. MozillaQuest is and has been unreliable. See MozillaQuestQuest for more information.

Props to Mozillazine for the link. If you want real Mozilla news, check out the latter link. Much more informative, and the discussions are at least somewhat insightful.

According to this article on MozillaZine you may be able to use Netscape's proprietary spell checker in Mozilla by installing the spell check XPI from Netscape 6.1.