Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla Pitches Firefox 3.1 Alpha For July Release

An anonymous reader writes "Just a week after Mozilla shipped Firefox 3.0, the open-source developer has proposed ship dates for the next version that, if approved, would produce an alpha release next month and a final no later than early 2009. According to a draft schedule discussed at a recent meeting, Mozilla wants to have the first Firefox 3.1 developer preview ready by July, then move to a beta by August. The schedule slates final code delivery in the last quarter of this year or the first quarter of 2009. A month ago, when Mozilla first started discussing Firefox 3.1 internally, Mike Schroepfer, the company's vice president of engineering, said the upgrade's target ship date was the end of 2008. If Mozilla holds to that plan, Firefox 3.1 would be its first fast-track update. Firefox 3.0, for instance, launched approximately 20 months after its predecessor, Firefox 2.0."

8 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. No Offence To The Devs or Firefox by Vectronic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But so what?

    There's nothing in the article or summary that hasn't already been covered in the other 76 articles about Firefox in the last 2 months.

    Firefox team is still developing Firefox... shit, so is Opera, so is IE, Safari, etc, etc...

    1. Re:No Offence To The Devs or Firefox by Kinky+Bass+Junk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Err, release dates, maybe?

      --
      Anonymous Coward
  2. There is no such thing as a quick Firefox release. by Cochonou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Firefox 2.0 was also supposed to be a quick development, based on the same gecko branch. It eventually took about a year.
    I think the past record of Mozilla.org has repeatedly shown that it is unable to release a product on time, given the huge amount of testing/fixing iterations that must come before the final release. A Firefox "quick release" will take time, and divert resources from important future projects such as Gecko 2.
    I would have thought Mozilla.org would have finally admitted that the architecture and development model of Firefox is characterised by long maturation times. This is needed to keep up its high quality level.

  3. Re:Firefox 3.0 is crash happy by aussie_a · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I do have add-ons installed and it hasn't crashed once. Aren't anecdotes fun?

  4. Re:Acid 3 by hedwards · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd really rather they focus on important things first. The Acid tests are specifically much harder than what a browser needs to handle to do a good job with web browsing, in fact a few of the tests specifically use broken code IIRC.

    Really the updates to the bookmark system scheduled for 3.1 are probably going to make a bigger impact on most users than Acid compliance would.

    I think the main point of getting 3.1 out there is to get the features in that couldn't be completed for 3.0 but weren't necessities. And with the level of rebuilding that 3.0 required it's not a shock that a few less important features would have to be dropped to get the important stuff finished.

  5. I wish they would fix the CPU hogging bug. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Well, I can dream, can't I?"

    I dream of a Firefox that doesn't have CPU hogging problems. Firefox 3 seems to be a little worse than the previous version.

    For those of us who open a lot of windows and tabs and leave them open a long time, as when doing research, Firefox is a hassle. It slows the entire computer until all windows and tabs are closed.

  6. Re:Acid 3 by Jellybob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would agree, but they HAVE to shoot for Acid 3 compatibility for the next release or browser nerds will be up in arms and it will be a huge PR problem.


    It'll only be a PR problem in the small circle of "browser nerds", everyone else will just get on with their lives, having realised there's more to life then what score your favourite browser gets in the Acid 3 test.

  7. Re:Acid 3 by Goaway · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Acid tests are specifically much harder than what a browser needs to handle to do a good job with web browsing, in fact a few of the tests specifically use broken code IIRC.

    The things tested by ACID3 are not in general use because browsers don't reliably support them. Many would be in use if they were actually supported. That is the aim of ACID3, to drive browser makers to actually fix these things so people can finally start using them.