Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firefox Roadmap Update

Posted by timothy on from the turn-left-go-fast dept.

wikinerd writes "The Firefox roadmap has been updated by Ben Goodger, Firefox lead engineer, who recently moved to Google. The updated roadmap reveals that Firefox 1.1, codenamed "Deer Park", will be released in June, after an Alpha release in March and a Beta version in April. Firefox 1.5 ("The Ocho") and 2.0 will be released later in the second half of 2005."

43 comments

  1. What's new in 1.1/2.0? by MBCook · · Score: 2, Insightful
    After a few minutes looking over the links, I didn't see a list of what the changes would be for 1.1 or 2.0. So for my education (and to prevent 30 comments with this same question)... can someone point us to that info?

    Thanks.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    1. Re:What's new in 1.1/2.0? by keeleysam · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/roadmap.ht ml

      Look in the summary column.

      --
      Nothing for you to see here, Please move along.
    2. Re:What's new in 1.1/2.0? by DrMorris · · Score: 1

      I read another roadmap about two weeks ago. IIRC some (small) changes in the extension interface were planned for 1.1, but that's all I can remember.

    3. Re:What's new in 1.1/2.0? by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      The summary consists of "Not feature compleate" "feature compleate" "release". So what are the features?

    4. Re:What's new in 1.1/2.0? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or look at this.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    5. Re:What's new in 1.1/2.0? by DrMorris · · Score: 2, Informative

      feature for 2.0:
      reconfigurable key bindings

    6. Re:What's new in 1.1/2.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New version numbers.

  2. Roaming profiles for Firefox by Matt+Perry · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Any hackers want to take on bug 249343 to port the Mozilla roaming profile code to Firefox?

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  3. Another bugfix suggestion by DrMorris · · Score: 1

    I still would like to see bug #67127 "Newline in tooltips (title attribute) converted to black bars" fixed... this bug dates back almost 4 years now!

    1. Re:Another bugfix suggestion by QuantumG · · Score: 1
      But just so everyone knows where you're coming from. You don't want this fixed enough to fix it yourself (learning how to program if necessary) or to pay someone else to fix it for you.

      Obviously if a bug is 4 years old it is not very important. If it is important to you, do something about it (and no, complaining that people who are already giving you a free lunch are not putting your favourite desert on the buffet is not "doing something").

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:Another bugfix suggestion by DrMorris · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Please have a look at the bug. Several fixes exist but haven't been incorporated into the CVS branch.

  4. Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by JPyObjC+Dude · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The biggest bug I see in *zilla is definitely the session cookie handling:

    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117 22 2

    IE (unfortunately) does a very good job at handling session cookies where: Any window launched from a browser window (window.open(), file>new>window, ctrl-N, ctrl-T open link in new window...) should share the same session cookie. Any new Browser window launched from the Operating System level icon or menu should have it's own session cookie.

    Unfortunately, this bug has not been picked up by anybody and is not on the roadmap for any release.

    As you can read from the threads, some users have serious problem with this bug as it does impact some multi-user security issues.

    The scope of fixing this is probably very huge and impacts many subsets of the mozilla frameworks. But is it not possible to do this just for Firefox? Maybe it being a `Browser Only` could allow hackers to branch some code designs in such a way that they can get a simplified model working and write it in a way that can be merged to the moz trunk without too much pain.

    Personally, this one is just way too huge for a minor hacker like I to tackle but I'm sure there are some brave souls willing to tackle this Everest of an issue.

    JsD

    1. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by QuantumG · · Score: 1
      Yawn, this is a feature request, not a bug. If it is so important to you pay someone to code it. Here's an idea: why not get together all the people you can find who want this feature and pool your funds?

      That's the way open source works: the person with the itch does the work, be it by firing up their source code editor or by paying someone else to do it for them.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      IE (unfortunately) does a very good job at handling session cookies where: Any window launched from a browser window (window.open(), file>new>window, ctrl-N, ctrl-T open link in new window...) should share the same session cookie. Any new Browser window launched from the Operating System level icon or menu should have it's own session cookie.
      Actually, that behavior would annoy the hell out of me, and I would consider it a bug. Is there some standards document that specifies this as the correct behavior for a browser? If not, I'd definitely vote against it.
    3. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      NO way. The java handling in firefox is mediocre at best. A java applet runs faster on IE still. Not to mention IE will run the applet, infect your PC and format your drive all at the same time.

    4. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by pkarlos_76 · · Score: 1

      THIS IS NOT A FEATURE request it is a hinderance to the compatibility of firefox with many websites, and therefor a bug.

    5. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Blah. It's a matter of opinion.

      Feature Request: Multiple logins on the same web site (that use session cookies).

      Bug: FireFox makes user log into unnecessarily when using multiple logins on the same web site (that use session cookies).

      Frankly I think it's a bug with the whole concept of session cookies. If you're a web developer and you want to fix this for your users it's really simple, use a session variable for username/password that is different for every app that you run on your website.

      For example, say you run bugzilla and phpmail on the same web site (assume also these both use session cookies, they probably don't). For bugzilla use the session variables bugzilla-login and bugzilla-password. For phpmail use the session variables phpmail-login and phpmail-password. Now configure both apps so they check for a session cookie on the login page instead of just assuming that a new login implies a new session.

      The browser is doing the right thing, the webapp developers just arn't playing nice together. Fixing the browser to fix these webapps is just plain bad mojo. In the mean time, if you want a work around, use different profiles.

      Oh, and the "security concern" about needing to close all FireFox windows to successfully log out of a webapp. That's such a load. You clear the session cookie in one window (say by the user pressing "logout") and it is cleared in all windows. If this feature were implemented this wouldn't be the case - less security, not more.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    6. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by JediTrainer · · Score: 1

      Frankly I think it's a bug with the whole concept of session cookies. If you're a web developer and you want to fix this for your users it's really simple, use a session variable for username/password that is different for every app that you run on your website.

      Doesn't always work. Take, for example, the users who might want to use the SAME app with two different logins at the same time. Happens at my work all the time - one of the main reasons why people here use IE. I use Firefox because I don't have that need (and I like FF better).

      --

      You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
    7. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by arkanes · · Score: 1

      This still isn't a bug. If it's a supported and desirable feature of the web application, then they need to support it themselves. Otherwise it's a perfectly legitimate and standards-compliant way of handling per-session cookies - and Firefoxes way of handling it is potentially much more secure when it involves things like banking. I can see a case being made for wanting the other behavior, but it's a feature request/behavior change that could(should?) be decided on by voting, not a bug that needs to be addressed.

    8. Re:Limit Scope of Session Cookies - 117222 by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      With FireFox you can just use multiple profiles if you really want that behaviour. So not only is this a feature request, it's a feature request that has already been implemented.. people are just bitching cause they don't understand why it is implemented that way and they think their suggestion to implement it a different way is acceptable because they've never looked at the code.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  5. Firefox is imporving a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny
    But Internet Explorer is still better.

    1. Re:Firefox is imporving a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But Internet Explorer is still better.
      Yeah, in bizarro world.
    2. Re:Firefox is imporving a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weird: if IE is that good, why doesn't it even start on my operating system?

  6. "Preview Release/Developer Preview" by DarthMAD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't really buy their explanation about changing from the terms "alpha" and "beta" ... I think that most people using Firefox know what alphas and betas are and calling a beta a "preview release" seems to be almost misleading, creating a false sense of finality, which is what they are ostensibly trying to avoid. It's really just marketing, if you ask me- not that this is entirely bad, but perhaps could be better done. Whatever... that's my two cents.

    1. Re:"Preview Release/Developer Preview" by wikinerd · · Score: 1

      I agree! Even the Windows users now know what a Beta is. There is no need to name it "Preview Release".

      Changing popular names confuse users. In general, when marketing people tinker with software they create a mess: Java 5 instead of 1.5, Preview Release instead of Beta, Windows 2000 instead of 5.0 (or Windows XP instead of 5.1 and Windows 2003 instead of 5.2), or even "Super Extra Fast Ultra DSL" (without any reference to the actual speed!).

      What the user wants is stable common names for various computing concepts. How can new users get familiar with IT if they have to grasp new terms for the same things over and over? The names "Alpha" and "Beta" have been used for many years and are more or less generally known, so it would be to the best interest of the users (experienced and newbies alike) to stick with them.

      BTW: Did you know that the final version of a software program is called "Gamma"? It goes like this: Alpha->Beta->Gamma (Gamma being the third letter in the Greek alphabet).

    2. Re:"Preview Release/Developer Preview" by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 1

      About Gamma: Yes. It's typical to hear this for example when talking about MySQL...they use it a lot in their documentation.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    3. Re:"Preview Release/Developer Preview" by pkarlos_76 · · Score: 1

      No the majority of average windows users, average windows users are not known to be the most intelligent when it comes to their computers and internet.

    4. Re:"Preview Release/Developer Preview" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. What do you think Firefox *is*, but "really just marketing"? It's no new technology - Gecko, XUL, tabbed browsing, popup blocking, etc - all mature and in use before Firefox came along. It's just a pretty face and some dumbing-down, so that AOLers aren't afraid.

      Welcome to Goodger-land. :)

  7. Codenames... by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

    The releases up to Firefox 1.0 were named after beaches.

    I believe "The Ocho" and "Deer Park" are rivers, but this is a complete guess. Ocho Rios is a resort town in Jamaca, Deer Park is a Gulfside town in Texas, so maybe the theme is still beaches...

    or maybe the theme is river deltas.

    --
    94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
    1. Re:Codenames... by GrumpySimon · · Score: 3, Informative

      One Tree Hill, Greenlane, Royal Oak and Three Kings aren't beaches. They're suburbs of Auckland, New Zealand, where a certain Mr. Goodger comes from.

      (and me!)

      --
      henry -- the human evolution news relay
    2. Re:Codenames... by cbqwinner · · Score: 1

      "The Ocho" was also the ESPN channel that the dodgeball competition was aired on, in the movie Dodgeball. That was the first thing I thought of at least. Funny movie...

    3. Re:Codenames... by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

      "The Ocho" was also the ESPN channel that the dodgeball competition was aired on, in the movie Dodgeball. That was the first thing I thought of at least.

      You thought correctly, then! Personally, though, I was disappointed that the Auckland suberb convention GrumpySimon mentioned ended: I was holding out for "Takapuna" where I was born, so I'd have some vague claim-to-fame...

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    4. Re:Codenames... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      And also there's the phrase, "Deer Park, that's good Browser" to be bandied about.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:Codenames... by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 1

      Ah, thanks for the clairifation.

      Releases 0.1 (Pescadero) to 0.5 (Naples) are all beaches or towns close to the ocean on the California Central coast.

      Indio and Glendale are down in the Los Angeles area, pretty far inland...

      Maybe I'm wrong about the whole beaches thing...

      --
      94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
  8. Slashdot & Firefox by skinfitz · · Score: 2, Funny


    The updated roadmap reveals that Firefox 1.1, codenamed "Deer Park", will be released in June, after an Alpha release in March and a Beta version in April.

    ...but will it display Slashdot correctly?

    1. Re:Slashdot & Firefox by at2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes

    2. Re:Slashdot & Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Copy link location and then paste it people. Bugzilla won't allow links from Slashdot.

      https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217 52 7#c145

  9. Ken Park by cuteseal · · Score: 1

    When's 1.2 - "Ken Park" coming out?

    --

    The friendliest digital photography forums on the net!

  10. Meanwhile by alexo · · Score: 1


    Meanwhile, slowly getting into FF and TB 1.0
    Can anyone point me to some recommended plugins?
    There are plugins that do similar things but (obviously) some are better than others.

  11. 7 months?! by mscnln · · Score: 1

    What happened to release early and often?

    1. Re:7 months?! by atrader42 · · Score: 1

      They are, for a web browser. In the first place, there are preview/beta releases along the way, or for the brave, there are cvs builds. In addition, a web browser, as any developer or gentoo user will be happy to tell you, is a huge undertaking. If you consider that the release cycle of Internet Explorer typically corresponds to major Windows revisions, Firefox is doing about as well as can be expected. Finally, if you're impatient for new functionality or fixes, there's the excellent extensions community for Firefox that releases on its own schedule.

  12. Are they fixing the Copy / Cut / Paste bugs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't have a bugzilla # to quote, but I'm sure if you search for "copy" you'll get a whole bunch of hits.

    Copying and pasting is completely sporadic for the Windows platform, and it's a total shame that everything worked perfectly in the preview release, and not in the final v1.0 package.