Gmail Calendar Documents Reader Web more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
Firefox 3.1 status update
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  7 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Mike Shaver  
View profile  
(1 user)  More options Feb 25, 12:25 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: Mike Shaver <mike.sha...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:25:59 -0800
Local: Wed, Feb 25 2009 12:25 pm
Subject: Firefox 3.1 status update
As David mentioned in his previous thread, we have been holding beta 3
on a handful of JS patches, chiefly "upvar"
(https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=452498).  That patch is
getting close, but the continuing and great work on fixing other
final-release blockers means that we're accumulating a lot of changes
on the 1.9.1 stream that would benefit from wider feedback from our
beta testers.  To that end, we're going to wrap up beta 3 in the next
week regardless of upvar status; a 4th beta will follow approximately
6 weeks after, as a vehicle for more testing of tracemonkey, video,
places and other eagerly-awaited improvements as well as feedback from
beta 3.

(Contrary to some reports, this "upvar" patch is not being taken as a
performance win at this point, but primarily to improve correctness
and robustness.  It lays a foundation that we believe will give us
great performance opportunities in the future, which is wonderful, but
not what's motivating its priority at this point.)

Analysis of our crash stats and other feedback indicate that we're in
a good position with respect to stability and robustness, with key
areas easily identified and a good understanding of the work needed to
remedy remaining issues.  (If you're one of the developers churning
through those bugs every day, it's easy to be pessimistic about them,
of course, which is a trait I value in engineers. :) )

Please join the product delivery call today at 11 Pacific for more
discussion of this, and thanks to everyone for their great work on
FF3.1 so far -- it's shaping up to be a very worth successor to
Firefox 3!

Mike


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Mike Shaver  
View profile  
 More options Feb 25, 3:51 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: Mike Shaver <mike.sha...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:51:24 -0800
Local: Wed, Feb 25 2009 3:51 pm
Subject: Re: Firefox 3.1 status update

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Simon Paquet <si...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Given all the efforts that went into FF3.1 and given its prolonged
> schedule and expanded scope, I was wondering whether it might make more
> sense to name it Firefox 3.5 just as Firefox 1.1 was renamed Firefox 1.5?

You are not the first to suggest that, indeed!  I think we should
discuss exactly that, but in another thread and after we get beta3 out
the door. :)

Mike


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
RyanVM  
View profile  
(1 user)  More options Feb 25, 8:05 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: RyanVM <rya...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:05:57 -0800 (PST)
Local: Wed, Feb 25 2009 8:05 pm
Subject: Re: Firefox 3.1 status update
Any chance of accepting new features that were originally intended for
1.9.2 given the addition of a 4th beta?

    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Mike Beltzner  
View profile  
 More options Feb 25, 8:36 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: "Mike Beltzner" <beltz...@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:36:16 -0800 (PST)
Local: Wed, Feb 25 2009 8:36 pm
Subject: Re: Firefox 3.1 status update
We are going to be extremely conservative here, using the criteria that we
use for non-blocker approvals. To get in, a feature will need to be:

 - complete: no follow up fixes or initial implimentations that commit us to
extending the schedule further
 - proven: patches with tests, security reviews and performance impact
analysis, baked on trunk for a good amount of time
 - valuable: we need to understand the benefit of taking the change, and why
it's needed for 3.1 instead of later
 - removable: backout-ready, if anything goes wrong

There are certain things which are tempting targets of opportunity, and I'm
happy to talk about them when people are done their work on the 120 blockers
that remain, but we should not consider this as a re-opening for new
features.

At least, as I understand things at this time :)

cheers,
mike


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Axel Hecht  
View profile  
 More options Feb 25, 9:13 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: Axel Hecht <l...@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 03:13:16 +0100
Local: Wed, Feb 25 2009 9:13 pm
Subject: Re: Firefox 3.1 status update
To add here, I think it's common understanding that we're keeping the
tree as string frozen as planned. Not sure if that's impacting the
features you're thinking about.

Axel

On 26.02.2009 2:36 Uhr, Mike Beltzner wrote:


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Mike Beltzner  
View profile  
 More options Feb 25, 9:17 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: Mike Beltzner <beltz...@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:17:10 -0800
Local: Wed, Feb 25 2009 9:17 pm
Subject: Re: Firefox 3.1 status update
On 25-Feb-09, at 6:13 PM, Axel Hecht wrote:

> To add here, I think it's common understanding that we're keeping  
> the tree as string frozen as planned. Not sure if that's impacting  
> the features you're thinking about.

Yes, definitely. Any string modifications will have to be for features  
with obvious and proven value, and ideally will be ready to go within  
the first week of re-opening as to minimize impact to our ability to  
ship locales.

I'm going to send some email shortly with a proposed schedule. Still  
trying to get a handle on what section of the P2s blockers we want to  
get in for Beta 3 code freeze.

cheers,
mike


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Clint Talbert  
View profile  
 More options Mar 4, 1:31 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: Clint Talbert <ctalb...@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:31:30 -0800
Local: Wed, Mar 4 2009 1:31 pm
Subject: Re: Firefox 3.1 status update
On 2/25/09 5:05 PM, RyanVM wrote:
> Any chance of accepting new features that were originally intended for
> 1.9.2 given the addition of a 4th beta?

Given our near in-ability to get the tree closed down for beta 3, I'd
say no.  I really think that 3.1 ought to stay as feature frozen as
possible at this point.  I don't want to repeat this "inability to close
on a beta" business when we roll around to beta 4 and I think that new
features would exacerbate this problem.

All that said, I would like to know what the features you are proposing
we take so we can make a more informed case-by-case decision, but I
still think that the scope for anything we take would have to be pretty
small and the benefit would have to be pretty high for us to take it
this late in the game.

My two cents.

Clint


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google