Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Mozilla 2 repository migration dirlist
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
 
Simon Paquet  
View profile  
 More options Mar 28 2007, 5:47 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.platform
From: Simon Paquet <web...@babylonsounds.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 23:47:27 +0200
Local: Wed, Mar 28 2007 5:47 pm
Subject: Re: Mozilla 2 repository migration dirlist
bren...@mozilla.org wrote on 28. Mar 2007:

>> I just wish that they would openly say so, and not try to tell
>> people otherwise or blind people's eyes with stuff like the
>> manifesto, which MoCo obviously has no intention to adhere to.

> Careful with the accusations of dishonesty or at least hypocrisy.

> There's strong feeling here, but not much that's true. If we didn't
> care about the platform for other apps, we would not take bugfixes,
> even late in the cycle or considered for inclusion on a maintenance
> branch, for bugs that don't affect Firefox. But we do (see, e.g.,
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362564 or
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=176182).

There's a difference between caring about the platform all of the
time (and thereby adhering to the manifesto) or doing so only some
of the time, which is my impression.

Just to be clear, I'm *not* calling you or other people from MoCo
a huge bunch of liars, who are betraying the project. That wouldn't
be true. But I see more and more indications that the project is
moving from the "multitude of products with a premier app" point to
the "One premier app and a bunch of other stuff which we tolerate
unless it does not get in our way" point.

The first one is fine, the second one is not. This feels more and
more like the days, when Netscape dominated the project and alienated
more people than it helped to recruit for the project.

> There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Firefox pays bills

Yes. And as a Firefox user/QA supporter from the m/b days I really
appreciate that and all the good it has brought to the project.

> Never mind that we have XUL App #2 (Thunderbird) and it faces
> other challenges because *it's not the browser*. I'm not saying a
> thick mail client should not be supported by the platform. I am
> saying it's bound to place or show, not win. That means it will
> not *necessarily* be included in the new repository.

What I really don't understand (maybe my lack of knowledge of VCSs
besides CVS is the reason) is, why the new repository must be
restricted to the core code and Firefox? What do we lose if we
add the other stuff like mail, mailnews, calendar, suite?

> Joost, Songbird, and Flock are not so hosted. Should they be, or
> our manifesto talk is all lies?

Don't you think that there is a huge difference between official
mozilla.org projects sustained by a real community and products
outside of mozilla.org, which are funded with VC money.

> But we're not going to make everyone happy. We're going to shrink
> and speed up our codebase

How will a restricted repository speed things up. You can already
restrict your cvs pull to directories which are needed by Firefox
and not pull the stuff in mail, mailnews, calendar or suite. Is that
not possible in Mercurial?

--
Simon Paquet
Sunbird/Lightning website maintainer
Project website: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar
Developer blog:  http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar


 
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.