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 Firefox 2 End Of Life
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
 
Zack Weinberg  
View profile  
 More options Oct 29 2008, 1:33 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.planning
From: Zack Weinberg <zweinb...@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:33:37 -0700
Local: Wed, Oct 29 2008 1:33 pm
Subject: Re: Firefox 2 End Of Life
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Mike Beltzner <beltz...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Presently 2/3rds of our users are using Firefox 3, with more than
> 50% accepting the first major upgrade offer back in late August.
> We're looking through Hendrix and other sources to understand why
> people didn't want to upgrade and ensure that those bugs have been
> fixed - if you know of any that would result in the product not
> working on a user's system, please point it out. Please do not point
> out UI changes - those objections are well understood.

I've heard two issues over and over again:-

 - the places fsync problem and related urlbar performance problems
   (gone in 3.1, one hopes)
 - must have a particular extension

Regarding the second, you said you were "watching add-on compatibility
numbers to ensure that the vast majority of Firefox 2 add-ons *still
under development* have been made compatible with Firefox 3".  Well, in
the majority of cases where I've had that come up, the extension in
question was *not* still under development, but was clearly still
heavily used (just looking at the trail of comments on AMO begging for
an upgrade).

I think it might be worthwhile to devote some of our attention to
popular but unmaintained extensions.  We could, for instance, have
some sort of "adoption agency" on AMO which lists unmaintained
extensions and encourages third-party developers to take them over.
(The Debian package adoption procedure might be a model.)  It might
even be worth spending internal developer effort on updating extensions
where the fix looks to be easy.

zw


 
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