Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
mozilla.dev.planning
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Places and Firefox 2
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  
 More options Apr 24 2006, 5:27 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: "Mike Shaver" <mike.sha...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:27:27 -0400
Local: Mon, Apr 24 2006 5:27 pm
Subject: Re: Places and Firefox 2
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On 24 Apr 2006 13:49:12 -0700, schiller <codedr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mike Connor wrote:
> > There's also the strong possibility that we'll be supporting
> > a subset of the WHATWG local storage spec in Gecko 1.8.1, based on sqlite.

> Weird, I hadn't heard that this would be a possibility on any of the
> planning meetings summaries or in the Firefox 2 Requirements wiki page.

http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox2/StatusMeetings/2006-04-04#Infrastruc...
mentioned it, and
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox2/StatusMeetings/2006-04-11#Infrastruc...
as well, plus the content meeting minutes from
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.platform/browse_frm/thread...

> What priority was that?

It hasn't had an explicit priority set, we're still in the
"investigative initial development" stage.  Is that important?

> In fact, seems that almost all the Places
> stuff was P1 (i.e. Mandatory) and the Release Criteria states "all P1
> product requirements are complete"...

So?  Are you trying to say that we are in violation of some contract?
Many items have had their priorities adjusted as we learned more about
them or considered the tradeoffs further, as is the case for virtually
every piece of software I've ever worked on.

If you're just pointing out that the priorities changed, and that what
we once thought was going to be central to Firefox 2 is no longer
something we're comfortable holding the release for, then you're just
repeating what Schrep posted to start this thread.

It would be helpful, possibly, for you to finish the sentence, since I
don't think the ellipsis is clear enough to make your point plain.
(It's not to me, at least.)

If you have input on the prioritization of Fx2 elements, please do
join us on the weekly call tomorrow to share it, or add it to the
agenda page beforehand.

Mike


 
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.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google