Slashdot Mirror


Problems With the Firefox Development Process

An anonymous reader writes "Mike Connor, one of the core Firefox developers, is raising a flag concerning the Mozilla Firefox methodology of development. From his blog: "In nearly three years, we haven't built up a community of hackers around Firefox, for a myriad of reasons, and now I think were in trouble. Of the six people who can actually review in Firefox, four are AWOL, and one doesn't do a lot of reviews." In an earlier entry, he raised concrete concerns about the community involvement. Asa Dotzler recently elaborated on the process, as previously covered on Slashdot."

28 of 563 comments (clear)

  1. Firefox is also Mozilla by TelJanin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Many of the devs are hard at work for plain Mozilla. This makes the development of Firefox seem slow, but a lot of code from Mozilla can be (and is) used in Firefox through the Gecko engine. You don't have to exclusivly work on Firefox to help Firefox.

    That said, I wish there were more devs working on Firefox-specific issues.

    1. Re:Firefox is also Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Many of the devs are hard at work for plain Mozilla. This makes the development of Firefox seem slow, but a lot of code from Mozilla can be (and is) used in Firefox through the Gecko engine. You don't have to exclusivly work on Firefox to help Firefox.

      That said, I wish there were more devs working on Firefox-specific issues.


      check out the mozilla source. The firefox browser is just compiled differently and with a few minor differences at the xul level. I really hate to see people thinking it's just gecko that's shared. There's xpcom, necko, nspr, etc... too ;-)

    2. Re:Firefox is also Mozilla by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a personal opinion: honestly, I can't see why one would want to use Firefox under Linux at all.

      For me, it's the extensions. If not for that I'd be using Konqueror.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    3. Re:Firefox is also Mozilla by Myen · · Score: 3, Informative

      IIRC, he's also thinking of a startup. See his blog (Google Feeling Lucky on his name), Feb 11 2005, third paragraph. I'm also guessing school is probably also a part of it :)

      (Who are the six that mconnor mentioned anyway?)

    4. Re:Firefox is also Mozilla by grandmofftarkin · · Score: 2, Informative
      Taken from wikipedia,

      "Because of Konqueror's modular nature, the Gecko layout engine from Mozilla can be used instead of Konqueror's KHTML renderer. This ability is called kmozilla and can be found in the kdebindings package".

    5. Re:Firefox is also Mozilla by Dan+Ost · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do realize that having nuke anything in addition to all-in-one gestures
      is redundant? Check out "Hide Object" and "Undo Hide Object" gesture targets.
      Personally, I find using gestures much easier than using a context menu to
      remove the object. Also, you can undo your hides without having to reload the
      page from scratch.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
  2. Re:It's the Branding by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Trademarks (unlike patents and copyrights) have to be defended against misuse and abuse or they may be judged to be unenforcible later.

    This is probably a harder thing to do in the open source world, and also much more important to establish a trustworthy brand and indentity.

  3. Re:Firefox is mostly a cute interface by asa · · Score: 3, Informative

    Firefox uses Mozilla (Gecko^H^H^H^H^HNGT) layout engine and network code, so FireFox is mostly a stripped down version of the Mozilla suite.

    Actually, you're wrong. Firefox isn't any kind of version of anything else. It is an application built on top of the Gecko core technologies, designed from the ground up to be a faster, cleaner, and more capable web browser for the largest possible audience.

    Mozilla 1.x is a completely different application built on top of the Gecko core technologies which was designed by a half a dozen different committees to emulate a seven year old monolithic suite of internet applications for a shrinking audience

    --Asa

  4. ok by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 5, Informative
    --

    --
    the strongest word is still the word "free"
  5. Re:It's the Branding by Dulimano · · Score: 5, Informative

    Somewhat related to the branding question, another Mozilla problem:

    RMS wants to rebrand Firefox.

    This thing will surely appear soon as another sensationalist Slashdot headline.

  6. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Maybe you are talking about this?

  7. Re:Community, Induviduals and Fun by Afrosheen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yeah, take a look at Linus Torvalds. He was the beginning kernel dev, but he sought help from individuals while the kernel was growing. Now he's pretty much a yay/nay guy that makes a few decisions now and then.

    Basically, if you document what you're doing, it's fairly easy to turn your project over to more people. If you don't document, then you're cementing your position as 'the coder' and making it that much harder for others to join in.

  8. Re:AWOL? by emurphy42 · · Score: 2, Informative
  9. Re:Engineering documents? by zootm · · Score: 2, Informative

    Further to the sibling post, Mozillazine's Extensions Dev page has a wealth of fantastic resources for creating stuff. Once you get into the nitty-gritty, XULPlanet is mighty handy (and probably constitutes a lot of the "documentation" you require. Also, O'Reilly's Mozilla book is available free online.

  10. Re:Case in point: vcards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Because if he wrote it without verifying with others first, he risks
    1. duplicating effort
    2. potentially (actually, probably) having his work rejected based on incorrect design.

  11. They often act out their anger. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 5, Informative


    I've posted bugs to Firefox Bugzilla. All I know about the Firefox "community" comes from that.

    One of the bug posts, about a serious memory leak that causes a complete crash, was handled in an angry way, even though I had spent hours documenting it on two computers and two operating systems.

    This is an extremely common phenomenon among Open Source authors. They often use their position as a way of acting out their anger. I was criticized because I use Firefox in a more intense way than other users! When I posted a carefully written response to the criticism, I got criticism for posting a long response.

    I offered to re-write the manual for another Open Source project, and got a negative response that was encouraging and discouraging at the same time.

    On another project, I entered a minor bug. The program was crashing if it saw a DOS end-of-text-file character in its text file input. I got back a long, philosophical discussion about why they were not willing to fix the bug because it was a problem that came from DOS.

    One person with an anger problem can literally control the development of an Open Source project by scaring away potential helpers.

    In my experience, the anger is often not expressed in a way that is obviously angry. It comes as opposition, sometimes very subtle opposition, even to good ideas or to useful help. The opposition vastly increases the amount of time required to contribute to a project.

    The serious Firefox crash I reported in October 2003 was still there in February 2005 in version 1.0, even though it was verified by others in a careful way.

    The background for all this is that Firefox is apparently the best browser, and an important window to the world for millions of people.

    This is an important subject, and there is a lot more to say, but I don't have time now.

  12. Re:What the Fuck did he have for Breakfast? by Bert64 · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's the american name, they're called Coco Pops in the UK.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  13. Re:What the Fuck did he have for Breakfast? by strider44 · · Score: 2, Informative

    and, at least, in Australia. Not really relevant, so no karma, but I just feel like pointing that out.

  14. Re:That's strange... by Lisandro · · Score: 2, Informative

    Huh? I can't recall how much the window install was, but my latest Opera install (v7.54, on Gentoo, Linux x86) was about 4MB - i think you refer to the Windows install, which includes the Sun Java runtime.

  15. Re:That's strange... by zonker · · Score: 2, Informative

    see that j? that means java. you are downloading the full sun java runtime library along with opera. you can choose if you want to download opera with or without it.

    try 3.5 MB for opera alone, the rest of that is java...

    so back to the issue, opera is 1.2 MB lighter...

  16. Oh, C'mon! by trezor · · Score: 2, Informative
    • Opera 7.11j - 12.5 MB ... Moz Firefox - 4.7 MB

    You know this is just plain stupid. Comparing Opera with Suns JRE bundled and Mozilla FireFox without any Java just isn't reasonable.

    At you are going to do a comparison, at least compare the proper versions to each other. That is Firefox (& JRE) vs. Opera (& JRE) or Firefox (bare) vs Opera (bare). And in any of those comparisons Operas footprint is indeed smaller (at least last time I checked).

    Please note that I am indeed using Firefox myself, but lets at least keep our facts somewhat reasonable.

    --
    Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
  17. Re:you forgot.... by Kick+the+Donkey · · Score: 2, Informative
    Tell me: How many open rendering bugs are their in IE? Oh, wait, YOU CAN'T (unless your a microsoft developer. If that's the case, When the hell are you going to fix it?).

    Trying to do CSS layout in IE is a giant pain in the ass, thanks to its insufferable interpretation of layout attributs...

    --
    /. is a bunch of nerds at a million typewriters. It's not a political conspiracy determined to undermine your beliefs.
  18. Re:That's strange... by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 3, Informative

    According to the Mozilla Foundation, Firefox is meant to be a browser. I guess the project is a complete failure if they have you thinking that Firefox is the next Java or something....

  19. Re:Firefox is mostly a cute interface by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Informative

    So what that he is working on FF? What did I say that contradicts the actual facts - FF is built on top of NGT with XULs, javascripts etc. FF is built on top of Mozilla engine. Yes it is technically different and it presents itself as a lighter version, but that was my point. Mozilla suite does a lot of what FF does not do, whether the code is completely different in FF from Mozilla does NOT matter. It could be a stripped down version of Mozilla. Instead it is a new codebase on top of NGT. So from point of view of perception FF is a stripped down version of Mozilla.

  20. Re:Firefox is mostly a cute interface by petecarlson · · Score: 2, Informative


    The most stable version I've used was 0.9. The last few releases have a habit of freezing up in various ways.


    I had the same experiance. I moved from mozilla to Firefox at .9 and then upgraded to 1.0. I loved .9 but 1.0 would freeze consistantly. I migrated to 1.0.1 last night and so far It works as well or better then 0.9.

  21. Re:what ever happened to mailing lists? by Deven · · Score: 2, Informative

    Can I use my donated time to firefox dev as a tax deduction, ie 10hrs a week = 200$ a week tax discount? perhaps...? is that possible?

    Not possible. The IRS does not allow the value of "personal services" to be taken as a tax deduction, even if they're performed for a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.

    --

    Deven

    "Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay

  22. Re:That's strange... by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Informative
    It's the same as in any language. You keep storing more and more objects, and do not "deallocate" what you've already stored ("deallocate" in quotes because in Javascript - as with any language with automatic GC - deallocation is a matter of removing references.) To make matters worse, it's increadibly easy to create references to objects without even trying, given browser-based Javascript's default behaviour of assuming any reference to a non-local variable is a property of the window object.

    GMail, from memory, makes regular queries via a hidden frame to Google's server. If an object is allocated each time the query is made and put somewhere where it cannot be deallocated (in an array, for instance) then you'll observe memory use increasing without anything useful occurring.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.