Slashdot Mirror


Moving towards Mozilla 1.0

fluedke writes "The latest Mozilla CVS identifies itself as "Mozilla 1.0". It looks like this source will become the official 1.0 within the next days. Read the news posting here." And if you're one of the missing hackers, speak up.

18 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. Bugzilla.mozilla.org by Penguinoflight · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you feel a sudden urge to help now that the project is entering it's final stages, checkout bugzilla.mozilla.org. You can help troubleshoot other bugs by trying to replicate, and figure out if there are browser problems, or webpage problems. You have to be a member, but the form is short.

    Check out http://bugzilla.mozilla.org

    --
    "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
    1 John 4:14
    1. Re:Bugzilla.mozilla.org by reaper20 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...and please people, before you report a bug, search through the list of duplicates and most reported.

      The open source community will likely cause the mozilla.org people more work by all reporting 500 versions of the same problem - especially with all the publicity 1.0 will be getting.

      And, if you report a bug, please follow through. There are umpteen bugs in bugzilla that are sitting there with a bug reporter that's MIA.

    2. Re:Bugzilla.mozilla.org by Reziac · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Question: if I submit a bug, will it be taken seriously, or if someone doesn't like what I find, will I get some BS about "must be just YOUR system"?? (Which considering I have a lot of experience as a software tester and bloody well know how to properly document bugs, is pretty annoying when it happens.) Because I know of two FATAL bugs right now, but my experience with the NNTP crowd (see another post I made in a similar thread) did not encourage me to bother pursuing it.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Bugzilla.mozilla.org by Swaffs · · Score: 4, Informative

      My experience has been that those on bugzilla want to correct bugs, not hide or deny them. If you can reproduce it well, and document that well, others will test for it, and assuming its a real bug and not your problem, they will confirm it as a bug. All submissions i've made have been taken seriously.

      --

      --
      "Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." - Homer Simpson [1F10]

    4. Re:Bugzilla.mozilla.org by dbarclay10 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It depends.

      All the reports I've submitted have been dealt with seriously. Sometimes that means, "sorry, we're not going to fix this for a while." That's understandable, they need to prioritise.

      Sometimes, the report is closed because it's not a bug - a particular thing behaves in a way I'm unhappy with, but which most people would prefer over the alternative I suggest.

      Most times, though, the bugs are just dealt with. I've never submitted a bug report which didn't get a reply of _some_ form within a few days.

      This is just in my experience. But I have to read a lot of bug reports myself (for Debian), and I gotta tell you, there is NOTHING more frustrating than somebody filing a bug report, saying "it doesn't work."

      WHAT doesn't work? In what way does it not work? How would you expect it to work?

      The more serious you are, the more serious you'll be taken.

      --

      Barclay family motto:
      Aut agere aut mori.
      (Either action or death.)
  2. something tells me ... by jms258 · · Score: 5, Funny

    that these missing mozilla hackers are, as we speak, being ruthlessly questioned under a single, dangling lightbulb ... probably in the dark basement of some government facility by various operatives from the FBI, CIA, and NSA, held under the pretense that they have somehow violated the dmca... just a hunch.

    1. Re:something tells me ... by farnsworth · · Score: 5, Funny
      that these missing mozilla hackers are, as we speak, being ruthlessly questioned under a single, dangling lightbulb ...[snip]

      romulan interegator: how many bugs do you see?

      missing mozillian: THERE ... ARE ... TWENTY ... THOUSAND ... BUGS!!!!

      romulan interegator: wrong, there are 20,001 bugs.

      --

      There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.

  3. Re:finally by galaga79 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sometimes I get the feeling that even if Netscape/Mozilla were 100 times better than IE the the majority of Windows users would still use IE because it is simply there by default. IE despite all its faults and security holes gets the job done for most users so why would they bother using anything else?

    Now don't get me wrong I reckon Mozilla is a great browser, better than IE ver 5 in my opinion but I think it's in for a hard time making a huge dent in MSIE's monopoly, at least as long they bundle and integrate IE with their operating system.

  4. Re:IE monopoly by johnnyb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyhow, why should we even care that much about the IE monopoly?

    **********

    Because more and more sites are being written with on ly one standard in mind - the IE standard.

  5. What will be special about 1.0 by jonasj · · Score: 5, Informative

    The main change is that many APIs (Application Programming Interface) have been frozen, which means that you can now create skins, plugins, add-ons, XUL applications, applications which embed Mozilla's layout engine Gecko, etc., which will work with all future Mozilla 1.x releases. In the past, it wasn't unusual for, say, skins developed for Mozilla 0.x to break as soon as Mozilla 0.y was released.

    Of course 1.0 is also more stable and polished than 0.9.9, just like 0.9.9 was more polished and stable than 0.9.8 and so forth, but the main thing is the API freeze.

    See also the Mozilla 1.0 Manifesto.

    --
    You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
  6. Re:finally by Xzzy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > make a dent in MSIE's monopoly in the windows browser world?

    And I retort, who fricking cares?

    Mozilla is open source, freely available, and heavily cross platform. Even if AOL mothballs netscape and lays off everyone that can't be changed.

    Why's it always gotta be about "conquering microsoft"? Can't people just USE the software and get on with their life? Let the dominance, or obscurity, come naturally. Long as you get software that does it's job well for you, it shouldn't matter one iota what other people are using.

  7. Re:finally by SurfsUp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the Netscape led group has (or will officially) release Mozilla... but is it too late?

    Too late to become the dominant browser on Windows? Probably. But too late to help Linux continue its march into mainstream operating system land? No way! And the fact that it runs on Windows is a definite help there.

    Also not too late to put a stop to Microsoft's attempts to privatize web standards, not to mention put a serious kink in attempts to force .NET down everybody's throat by way of the browser.

    Also, not too late to make all those surfers who like to kill popup ads very happy.

    --
    Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
  8. Re:my question by thales · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "i never could figure out why the mozilla browser keeps switching from instant skin changing to skin changing upon reboot:

    Because Parts of the old skin keep showing up in the new skin. This mainly happens when the old skin has a css rule that the new skin lacks. going to reboot flushes the old skin out of memory. They drop it to cut down on the number of bugs in an impending milestone release, then pick it up again later only to drop it again for another release.

    --
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
  9. Best thing of all is... by Jack+William+Bell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    hmm... I just read all the +1 and higher responses and no one has mentioned the thing I personally think is the best thing of all about Moz going 1.0 -- It means they finally freeze the API's.

    I don't know how many of you have checked out XUL and the Moz extension API's, but with them you have the ability to write literally any kind of application with an Open Source, Cross Platform, UI built using Moz via XML, HTML and a little javascript. This, I believe, is the most revolutionary thing about Moz! Using it for a UI surface, I can encapsulate routines that require speed in a C or C++ module (or even Python, Java and some other languages) and do the rest in not too much a different way than creating a DHTML web page. And the resulting UI code is portable...

    And the end result is fairly fast as well. All of the browser itself, all of the built-tools like the mail manager, the calendar, the IRC chat and so on are implemented this way. The potential of Moz as a UI development API is huge, assuming anyone creates a decent IDE for it. Nonetheless you can do things right now without an IDE, and (because the API's are frozen) you can be confident it will work with bug fix releases until they do a major update.

    During development many projects demonstrating these capabilities were obsoleted when the API's changed out from under them, causing the developers to stop work until the API froze. With this at an end I fully expect to see some really cool stuff fairly soon. Check http://www.mozdev.org for some example projects (most of which probably won't go anywhere soon, but some of which are the kinds of thing I am talking about).

    Jack William Bell

    --
    - -
    Are you an SF Fan? Are you a Tru-Fan?
  10. Re:My problem with Moz. is the way they handle bug by Kiwi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Gave up on the idea of submitting bugs after being flamed on (and then apparently banned from) the NNTP server just for arguing (as civilly as this post) that removing certain features was highly undesirable from a user's POV.

    As someone who has banned people from the software devlopment list from my own open-source project, I think it may help you to understand why open-source developers sometimes do this.

    People often times fail to understand that an open source project is different from a commercial project. In any releation where one person is paying another person, there is an implied releationship where the person paying the money does not have to respect the person whom they are paying. The person with the money can be pretty irrespectable and still act in a socially acceptable manner. The recipient, after all, is getting paid.

    People who are used to using commercial software approach open source software in the same manner. They join a NNTP server or a mailing list for the project in question. They start ordering around the open source software devlopers, tell them what features the program must have. They don't say "please"; they certaintly don't give the open source devloper an ounce of respect. They act as if they were paying the free software developer. But they aren't.

    This kind of person gets rather flustered when they realize that the releationship between an open source devloper and a user is different than the one between a customer and a company. The open source developer is, in the hierarchy of computer geeks, higher up on the ladder than an end user who can't code is. The sooner the end user understands this, the sooner they can treat the developer in a way which will not result in them getting flamed and banned.

    People write software and give it away for a number of reasons, of course; but one main motivation is to obtain respect. The more open source projects one has worked on and finished, the higher the person is in the strange pecking order of the world of free software. Make enough code, and you too can be a demigod like Larry Wall, RMS, Linus Torvalds, or Dan Bernstein. Even if you are not a demigod, saying "I am a developer for this project" where the project is well known will cause you to commanded more respect.

    It's simple. Respect the developer, and they will respect you. Don't respect them, and they will not respect you. Once you understand this, you are on your way to having your bug reports being acted on. Pretty soon, you will be patching; if the patch is good, you will gain more respect from the developers. Eventually, an open-source project will call you and you will respond to the call.

    Good luck in your journey.

    - Sam

    --

    The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.

  11. The Big Picture by Fragmented_Datagram · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trying looking beyond simple web browsing. If MS controls the means of accessing the Internet that 99% of users use, then they control the Internet. Repeat after me, then they control the Internet. Now, let's look at how:

    1) Any future technological advancements (or 3rd party plugins) for the web are subject to Microsoft's approval. If it's not in their financial interest, it doesn't get included in the browser.
    2) msn.com is the default page for IE. Most users don't change their default page. Microsoft can then charge lots of money for people to place their ads on msn.com. Secondly, Microsoft can use msn.com to promote their own products by either placing ads for them, writing "news articles" that promote them, or simply because they control the search engine results.
    3) Microsoft's Media Player could be integrated into the browser and IE could more simply and easily play WMA files. If most people use WMA to encode their media files and it becomes the "standard", Microsoft can charge money for encoding music in that format.
    4) Microsoft can gradually change HTML (or add a completely new proprietary web format) in their favor so that other browsers (and other operating systems) don't work properly.

    And on and on and on...
    Why do you think Microsoft wanted to "choke off Netscape's air supply"? Controlling the way people access the Internet gives them almost complete control of the Internet and allows them to further stifle competition as well as become very wealthy.

  12. Re:finally by rseuhs · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's too late to affect de-facto standards. It's too late to have any chance of becoming the most popular browser.

    What about:

    • 30 million AOL customers?
    • PS3 will use Mozilla and if it is as successful as PS1 (100 Million) or PS2 (30 Million and selling over a million per month), there will be tens of millions new Mozilla-users in the net.
    • Yes, Linux is making inroads into the desktop, like it or not. South Korea's governement has recently decided to convert 1/4 of their desktops (several hundred thousand).
    • Being multiplatform is an advantage. For example people will prefer Mozilla over IE at work if they know it from their PS3 at home.
    • Mozilla has features people want. Modem users want to safe time with HTTP1.1 pipelining, almost all users don't want popups. If you look at browser stats you see that a lot of people are willing to download a new version of IE, why shouldn't they also download a version of Mozilla? Especially because Mozilla isn't entrenched into the OS, so upgrading to Mozilla is certainly not as risky as upgrading IE.
    • Also don't underestimate people's tastes and opinions. It's IMPOSSIBLE to do a product that everybody likes best, so even if Mozilla wouldn't have mroe functionality than IE, SOME people will like the interface/look/feel/whatever better. "With everything being equal", not all 100% will choose IE.

    In the short term, Mozilla/Netscape7 will almost certainly destroy the de-facto IE-standard (even with only 10% marketshare, webmasters can't afford to ignore Mozilla), in the long term (5 to 10 years) I'd say it has good chances to overtake IE.

  13. Re:NS is the worst thing for web developers by Aanallein · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Obviously, everybody saying "yaay for Netscape" isn't a real web developer.
    Obviously your definition of a "real web developer" is somewhat skewed. Beyond the extremely useful tools like the javascript console and the DOM inspector *drools*, if anyone understands the need for official standards, it should be web developers. Not if you're someone who has no real idea about the standards and only learned to develop by looking at Dreamweaver output, but definitely if you're in this for the long run, and want to someday not have to include additional if statements for various browsers anymore. And the only way that can come about is if browser-vendors will stop pushing their own proprietary extensions. Netscape was at least as bad as IE, but now they've been turned. IE somewhat supports most basic functionality from the standards, even though still horribly broken at various points. If this improves, the day comes very near where you only have to write scripts once, and then have them perform flawlessly forever on all browsers that come after.
    You've tested "lots of various DHTML - I want to bet they all failed because of the same two or three issues. If you're a "real web developer", fixing them is a matter of minutes. Don't complain about Mozilla just because you are incapable...