Chief Lizard Wrangler axed

Accurate information here by Satai · 2001-09-05 04:13 · Score: 5, Informative

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

Re:Accurate information here by Gerv · 2001-09-05 04:26 · Score: 3, Informative

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 by tim_maroney · 2001-09-05 05:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

For all the flaming of MozillaQuest by the Mozilla faithful, I have yet to see the flamers document a single objective inaccuracy. Most of the responses consist of personal attacks devoid of content. In this case, we have to look at the fact that MozillaQuest broke the layoff story -- accurately -- while the advocacy site, MozillaZine, was still in denial about the prospect of the AOL layoffs hitting the project.

As far as I can tell, MozillaQuest's only crime is in pointing out facts about the late, buggy, and ugly Mozilla project that its small remaining core of advocates would rather see suppressed.

Tim
Re:Accurate information here by ajs · 2001-09-05 05:47 · Score: 4, Informative

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....

Re:Where is she going? by sparcv9 · 2001-09-05 04:26 · Score: 4, Redundant

According to her reply to the Bugzilla post, she will continue to work on the Mozilla project, just not under the employ of Netscape.

--

This is not a Fugazi .sig

MozillaQuest not to be trusted by asa · 2001-09-05 04:26 · Score: 5, Informative

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.

Please don't link to bugzilla from the front page! by ardran · 2001-09-05 04:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

CmdrTaco et al,

Please don't link directly to a bugzilla bug ever again, at least not from the front page. The system is under constant use by bug reporters, triagers, and developers, who are all working hard to make the 0.9.4 milestone happen as fast as possible. /.'ing the server only serves to disrupt development. In the future, please think about the people who are relying on a particular server before targetting it for destruction. Thanks.

Don't Look At Bugzilla! by Gerv · 2001-09-05 04:32 · Score: 5, Interesting

Please don't slashdot our Bugzilla server! Please! We need it, and currently it's dying.

Gerv

How this bodes for the Mozilla project by hillct · 2001-09-05 04:33 · Score: 3, Interesting

This question was raised in the posting, but it begs a deeper question. Are OSS Projects dependant on their founder?. The imediate reaction is no, expecially in this case where she was not the founder. The closes to a single indevidual founder we could get for Mozilla would be Jamie Zawinski and the project continued on without him, but how many OSS projects are organized as a cult on personality? Is this a failing of social order of OSS, or is it just a failing of leadership and administration?

Large scale projects like Mozilla, and Apache could probably withstand a complete changing of the guard, but how many smaller prjects could handle such a change and still continue to produce quality software?

Does anyone have a mechanism to quantify the critical mass of an OSS project?

--CTH

--

--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line

Some more info by CondeZer0 · 2001-09-05 04:44 · Score: 3, Informative

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

--
"When in doubt, use brute force." Ken Thompson

AOL Deathblow? by idonotexist · 2001-09-05 04:44 · Score: 3, Interesting

Please excuse my thoughts of a potential conspiracy theory here. Given the significance of AOL (Netscape) developers to the Mozilla project and the lay off of a (significant?) number of employees, including lead developers, to Mozilla, it seems to me AOL is attempting to kill Mozilla. Why else would AOL make such a move? I mean, what other result would come from this by not continuing support of Mozilla? (eh, 'mozilla is available for download' is not significant support imo).

The motive? Who knows. Recently, though, AOL and Microsoft were engaged in intense negotiations regarding the inclusion of AOL in Windows XP.

--
"There ought to be limits to freedom"

Re:AOL Deathblow? by 4of12 · 2001-09-05 07:44 · Score: 4, Insightful
No, no, no.

The conspiracy theory is about half right.

AOL wants to keep Mozilla waiting in the wings as a potential threatening poker chip in its negotiations with MS about desktop icon placement, default MSN services, whether AOL will pursue the legal complaints that Netscape originally filed, etc.

These negotiations pivot about various points, such as whether AOL will use IE or Netscape, whose streaming media format they will support, etc. As such, the poker chips in this game can be quite important and valuable because the game is for such very high stakes.

The Netscape/Mozilla browser represents a bugaboo to MS for two reasons.
1. As a ghost of a vanquished enemy that could be brought back to life to challenge IE if suddenly AOL were to release tens of millions of CDs with a working Mozilla on it.
2. The same ghost carries with it the wounds it suffered during the famous Air Supply Cutoff that the Dept of Justice is so intent upon examining. Rather than have AOL with a well funded legal department display the corpse for all to see, it is better to lay flowers on that grave and not upset the status quo.
The upshot is that Mozilla is an excellent poker chip where it stands now, getting preened but not quite ready for prime time. It serves AOL's purpose well in keeping the beast of Redmond at bay.

If the Mozilla poker chip were actually played, either releasing it for general widespread use or using its legal status to beat up MS in the courts, then a lot of blood and fur would fly. Not a business decision that they want or need right now.

Kind of like the book and movie Shogun, if you recall the end, where Lord Toranaga keeps Anjin-san building dangerous ships to keep his adversaries at bay, but secretly Lord Toranaga burns the ships when they are in danger of becoming a full fledged reality.
--
"Provided by the management for your protection."

I can see the new MozillaQuest headlines now by chabotc · 2001-09-05 04:51 · Score: 5, Funny

"Mozilla milestone 0.9.4 delayed again: due to a large conspiricy, the slashdot community decided to kill of mozilla's bugzilla server, completely stoping all work on the branch".

In related news, from the bugzilla 2.5.1 Changelog:
* Added a slashdot effect filter, if HTTP_REFER = '*slashdot.org', show a 404 page.

Bugzilla Mirror - Use this instead. by cetan · 2001-09-05 05:00 · Score: 3, Informative

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

Don't kill bugzilla.mozilla

--
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!

Re:Please don't link to bugzilla from the front pa by cetan · 2001-09-05 05:03 · Score: 5, Informative

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

--
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!

MozillaQuest for eradication... by linuxwolf · 2001-09-05 05:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.

What's next, using the National Enquirer? by Kelson · 2001-09-05 05:17 · Score: 3, Informative

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:Please don't link to bugzilla from the front pa by GoNINzo · 2001-09-05 05:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

Why don't you just do a apache redirect? Instead of dynamically create that page, add an apache rule to the httpd.conf to redirect the traffic to a static page, or better yet, off the site entirely using a different server. It's a quick hack to get your users back up and running.

But I think a better solution would be to create a forum for such discussions, not within the bug discussions themselves.

--
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty

Re:Layoffs are unfortunate, but normal business by The+Cat · 2001-09-05 05:59 · Score: 3, Insightful

Yeah, the great job mobility which translates to "start over every six months."

I'll vote for a different business cycle. Tough to qualify for a mortgage (HA! right...) when you're between jobs three months out of every nine.

It's also mind-bogglingly expensive for companies to replace their staff every 18 months.

(Notice how everything is measured in months now? Remember long-term planning? Or is that part of the old economy?)

New threat to the internet by Anonymous Coward · 2001-09-05 06:04 · Score: 5, Funny

-PAFP
September 5 2001, 4:54 AM
It has been discovered that a new and mysterious underground hacker-website called the "Slash Dot" has developed a powerful & destructive cyberweapon. Sources say that by "hyper linking" to a government or industry webserver, the Slash Dottors can destroy the victom's operations for days at a time. A recipient of a hyper link attack this Wednesday was the site called "Mozillabug", a massive technological service used by thousands of businesses to obtain free program "code". FBI spokespeople were unavailable to comment, it is believed a presumably insane collegue died of laughing upon hearing about this new internet security threat.
Industry leader Microsoft Corp [MSFT] has recomended users perchase their new Windows XP operating system in order to take advantage of their new innovation: a firewall. Firewalls are believed to protect users against all internet security threats, but Microsoft spokespeople were unable to elaborate due to lack of knowledge in the subject.
Meanwhile, reports are coming in that members of the Slash Dot called "Anonymous Cowists" are posting the phrase "Hacked By Chinese" on message boards all over the internet. British MPs have claimed in Parliament that reading those messages can cause keyboards to emit green haze.

Joe Bloggs, PAFP news.

Re:Yes, referer is what I also was thinking. by cruelworld · 2001-09-05 07:47 · Score: 3, Funny

just post a re-direct to goatse.cx

Re:MozillaQuest? by HiThere · 2001-09-05 08:00 · Score: 3, Informative

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.

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.

22 of 213 comments (clear)