The two lead engineers have been working paid full-time on this for years, where do you think those resources are coming from? The mozilla build team has pushed releases, Thunderbird has had its place on mozilla.com along side Firefox etc.
Basically, the issue now is - how is Thunderbird going to survive without all this support? I'm not saying it all is going away, but Thunderbird WILL have to do more on its own. As I understand it, Mozilla Foundation/Corporation (not sure which) might still help out somewhat financially, but I am not sure of the status on that situation.
However, I think there's no reason to believe "it's all over". There are plenty of other organizations/companies doing top-notch Mozilla work without being a physical part of Mozilla Corporation. See Joost, Songbird, and others. Also, it will be interesting to see what high-level decisions are taken by the Thunderbird team now that they will be more independent. I think there's a chance they will have to think more radically about Thunderbird's place in the world than what has been the case up until now.
We have this problem (with too large windows) in many places of Mozilla's UI. The preferences window's too big window is a well-known problem, to something we don't really have a fix for so far.:-(
Wells Fargo does work, but not completely. Currently there are three open bugs in our database having to do with this site.
Two of them are Evangelism bugs, which means that Wells Fargo are using non-standard (or even invalid) standards that Mozilla does not support (such as ).
See the bugs here:
* http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65110
* http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87351
And finally, there is one Mozilla bug that is triggered with this site, although quite minor; you are not able to tab through all the widgets on the site:
* http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114119
It's a really old bug, that now has a patch that may make it work soon for Windows... but it still needs patches for the other platforms.
The problem lies in platform-specific code, you see.:-(
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9449
Re:Major Roadblock to using Mozilla
on
Mozilla Bug Week
·
· Score: 1
The main reason for the lack of spellchecking is Mozilla is not the codebase, in fact, we already have support for spellchecking. The problem is that we've been unable to find one that is compatible with out license so we can check it into the CVS tree.
See the netscape.public.mozilla.mail-news newsgroup for more info, since this is almost a FAQ by now.
If you are eager to see a success happen; help out!
The whole idea of OSS software, is that nothing will happen without people. More and more people are working on Mozilla now, but a year or so ago there was a lack of contributors (apart from Netscape).
Just don't sit there whining - if you indeed want it to succeed - do something about it!
...is trying to figure out where a bug should be filed. The bug page is daunting, especially if you aren't familiar with modules and how they are broken down.
1. Go to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org
2. Click the big "Report a Bug" link
What the hell is going on with Mozilla? I made fun of them more than a year ago because three years had passed and the damn thing was still not out the door. [...] But I'm getting off topic. Yes, software takes 10 years to write.
Is it just me or is that just a tiny bit contradictory?
Finally, the lack of any WYSIWYG editor for XUL means that it does not address the most serious problem in UI development, which is that designers who are not programmers should be able to create their own interfaces. The current model in which designers create specs and prototypes which are then implemented by programmers is expensive and unreliable. These two groups rarely get along well and the implementers rarely have any interest in understanding the design principles behind the specification. The result is that good design specifications often make terrible implemented interfaces, and do so at great cost. Breaking the dependence on the programmer is the best way to address the problem, and that can't be addressed by a system like XUL, which the W3C noted is an obscure mix of several different programming language paradigms.
If you want a XUL WYSIWYG app, you'll need to help out making one!
One thing I would like to see (outside of the roll-your-own system) is some sort of componentized download - so if I wanted just the web browser, and nothing else (mail/news, composer, etc...) so I could download a smaller file, and have a smaller memory footprint, compared to someone who uses the mail client and/or the composer, who could trade a larger download/memory footprint for those extra features.
You can download the so called "stub installer" - wehere you select components (e.g., Mail/News, Composer, Browser...) and then it downloads your choices and installs it!
> First of all, I don't know if it's me, but the modern skin doesn't display well; I solved it by substituting chrome/modern.jar for an old version.
Or just use the Classic theme.
> What I'd like to know is how performance is going in Linux and platforms besides Windows. I use the Windows version and it is real fine, but I've heard that other versions are slower.
We need more contributors on the Linux side. As always, Windows is the platforms with the most users and hence why development sometimes tend to improve more over there.
However, I also believe the Linux (and of course mac) should be made as high priority as Windows is. We can only get there with more contributors!
Furthermore, remember that Mozilla is mostly XP (Cross-platform code), which means that the only things that are Linux/Mac/Windows/whatever specific is the backend implementation. Improve that, and all the XP code gets snappier for the platform in question.
Now, come over to mozilla.org and read the docs - help us make this browser even faster and less buggy!
Slashdot Mirror
Of course they did.
The two lead engineers have been working paid full-time on this for years, where do you think those resources are coming from? The mozilla build team has pushed releases, Thunderbird has had its place on mozilla.com along side Firefox etc.
Basically, the issue now is - how is Thunderbird going to survive without all this support? I'm not saying it all is going away, but Thunderbird WILL have to do more on its own. As I understand it, Mozilla Foundation/Corporation (not sure which) might still help out somewhat financially, but I am not sure of the status on that situation.
However, I think there's no reason to believe "it's all over". There are plenty of other organizations/companies doing top-notch Mozilla work without being a physical part of Mozilla Corporation. See Joost, Songbird, and others. Also, it will be interesting to see what high-level decisions are taken by the Thunderbird team now that they will be more independent. I think there's a chance they will have to think more radically about Thunderbird's place in the world than what has been the case up until now.
Pygame is a really nice wrapper around SDL (http://www.pygame.org./ There are plenty of guides and tutorials on the website.
:-P
Why use Perl when you can use Python?
Yes, it will be fixed in Mozilla 0.9.8 -- it didn't catch the 0.9.7 train, sorry.
1
See: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11110
We have this problem (with too large windows) in many places of Mozilla's UI. The preferences window's too big window is a well-known problem, to something we don't really have a fix for so far. :-(
See: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86305
Wells Fargo does work, but not completely. Currently there are three open bugs in our database having to do with this site.
9
Two of them are Evangelism bugs, which means that Wells Fargo are using non-standard (or even invalid) standards that Mozilla does not support (such as ).
See the bugs here:
* http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65110
* http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87351
And finally, there is one Mozilla bug that is triggered with this site, although quite minor; you are not able to tab through all the widgets on the site:
* http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11411
Hope this helps.
It's a really old bug, that now has a patch that may make it work soon for Windows... but it still needs patches for the other platforms.
:-(
9
The problem lies in platform-specific code, you see.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=944
The main reason for the lack of spellchecking is Mozilla is not the codebase, in fact, we already have support for spellchecking. The problem is that we've been unable to find one that is compatible with out license so we can check it into the CVS tree.
See the netscape.public.mozilla.mail-news newsgroup for more info, since this is almost a FAQ by now.
Now, this is where we need more developers, testers and supporters for projects such as GNOME, KDE, Mozilla and AbiWord!
The whole idea of OSS software, is that nothing will happen without people. More and more people are working on Mozilla now, but a year or so ago there was a lack of contributors (apart from Netscape).
Just don't sit there whining - if you indeed want it to succeed - do something about it!
A great place to start: is here
1. Go to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org 2. Click the big "Report a Bug" link
then just follow the instructions.
Couldn't be easier!
This isn't Microsoft. What's your point? ;)
Report a bug! ;)
A common problem with people, as previously said, is that some people take "bugreports" as "bugs" and vice versa.
:)
A bug report is always a good thing, regardless whether it's a WORKSFORME bug, INVALID or will get FIXED. It means good testing.
A bug, on the other hand, is something that needs fixing and is never good.
See the difference?
Oh god, when will people learn; MozillaQuest is not a reliable source for Mozilla development information!
I'm so tired of this. All the major geek news sites like this one keeps posting new references to this very misinforming site.
Please boycott it. I know I will.
Yay, so if you win, you receive a free copy of the buggy operating system? Who-hoo!
What the hell is going on with Mozilla? I made fun of them more than a year ago because three years had passed and the damn thing was still not out the door. [...] But I'm getting off topic. Yes, software takes 10 years to write.
Is it just me or is that just a tiny bit contradictory?If you want a XUL WYSIWYG app, you'll need to help out making one!
Check out XULMaker: http://xulmaker.mozdev.org
You can download the so called "stub installer" - wehere you select components (e.g., Mail/News, Composer, Browser...) and then it downloads your choices and installs it!
Sounds like what you're asking for.
... although you can set Google as your auto-search engine in your prefs and then have it search there.
Any bug that is a topcrasher has been reported many, many times to our talkback.
:)
That's what topcrashers are all about. Remember that we also have normal crashers...
> First of all, I don't know if it's me, but the modern skin doesn't display well; I solved it by substituting chrome/modern.jar for an old version. Or just use the Classic theme. > What I'd like to know is how performance is going in Linux and platforms besides Windows. I use the Windows version and it is real fine, but I've heard that other versions are slower. We need more contributors on the Linux side. As always, Windows is the platforms with the most users and hence why development sometimes tend to improve more over there. However, I also believe the Linux (and of course mac) should be made as high priority as Windows is. We can only get there with more contributors! Furthermore, remember that Mozilla is mostly XP (Cross-platform code), which means that the only things that are Linux/Mac/Windows/whatever specific is the backend implementation. Improve that, and all the XP code gets snappier for the platform in question. Now, come over to mozilla.org and read the docs - help us make this browser even faster and less buggy!
It's amazing how many topcrashers that have been fixed in the past three milestones. Mozilla is getting rock solid and stable.
Yup. Actually, I was the one whom fixed it. :)
No it isn't. The current image library is called imglib, but it's sequel is currently called libpr0n, yes. :)
This post, as many other regarding this article, is irrelevant as this is not a mozilla.org project but a third-party add on provided by mozdev.org