Chief Lizard Wrangler axed

Kalak writes: "MozillaQuest is reporting that Mitchell Baker was laid off by Netscape back on August 23. True to form, there are also discussions on this on bug #96747." She spoke at OSCON and I was pretty impressed. She seemed legitimately committed to the mozilla project being a successful open source project. Not sure how this bodes for Moz itself, but it sure is unfortunate.

Comments

Accurate information here

[Satai]

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

Re:Accurate information here

[Gerv]

This is intentional. It's a joke. :-) The page is served as text/xml - its correct MIME type - and only Mozilla understands it correctly.

Gerv

Re:Accurate information here

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, IE renders the page as it renders most xml documents: an expandable, hierarchical representation of the data. You can expand or collapse data to see more or less information about the data.

Re:Accurate information here

[ajs]

Contradiction coming... wait for it...

For all the flaming of MozillaQuest by the [...] late, buggy, and ugly Mozilla project [and] its small remaining core of advocates [...]
[snipped from the beginning and end of the post to show the contrast in tone]

This is called flaming. MozillaQuest is factually inaccurate from time to time (though, so is the rest of the tech media). The problem isn't that. The problem is that MozillaQuest reports only part of the story. This story, for example, never reported that, while she was being laid off, she was also going to continue working on the project.

So called "delays" are often clarifications in the time-line (where no dates were previously available). This may or may not be an inaccuracy, depending on how you look at it, but is clearly a misrepresentation of the state of Mozilla development.

Mozilla is, for the record, the browser/mail agent that I've been using as my sole browser for the last six months. So far, I've had less crashes than IE, and far fewer bug-related complaints than with NS4. And yet, according to MozillaQuest, Mozilla is still too buggy for anyone to use....

MozillaQuest not to be trusted

[asa]

In general it is good practice to avoid reading this website if you're interested in accurate reporting about Mozilla or mozilla.org (probably anyhing else for that matter). With articles like "Netscape Denies It Uses Mozilla Code in Netscape 6.1" you have to wonder...

Anyway, if you want real information about what's going on why not ask the folks actually involved. Mitchell Baker (still chief lizard wrangler) had this to say in the mozilla news groups.

Some more info

[CondeZer0]

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

Thanks for keeping us from working.

[fabiang]

Just wanted to say thanks for keeping us from working with our main tool, Bugzilla. I hope we don't have to suffer this again in the future.

-Fabian.

Bugzilla Mirror - Use this instead.

[cetan]

http://www.necrosys.net/mirrors/bug_96747.html

Don't kill bugzilla.mozilla

Re:Please don't link to bugzilla from the front pa

[cetan]

I know this is redundant to a post I made below, but I put up a mirror here:

http://www.necrosys.net/mirrors/bug_96747.html

What's next, using the National Enquirer?

[Kelson]

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).

Re:MozillaQuest?

[HiThere]

Yet another argument infavor of using a referer to suppress /. at bugzilla. Please stop doing this. It's quite inconsiderate, after there have already been requests to avoid slashdotting that particular server.

Development servers are typically sized for the load that they will normally receive. They aren't expected to have to stand up to the kind of pounding that a high traffic server would have. It is not kind to abuse them in this way.