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
mozilla.dev.platform
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
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
 
brendan@mozilla.org  
View profile  
 More options Mar 28 2007, 3:48 pm
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.platform
From: "bren...@mozilla.org" <bren...@mozilla.org>
Date: 28 Mar 2007 12:48:17 -0700
Local: Wed, Mar 28 2007 3:48 pm
Subject: Re: Mozilla 2 repository migration dirlist
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Mar 28, 10:24 am, "bren...@mozilla.org" <bren...@mozilla.org>
wrote:

> On Mar 28, 9:51 am, Gervase Markham <g...@mozilla.org> wrote:
> > Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> > > All of our apps are going to be built on the xulrunner core in the moz2
> > > timeframe, and the repository structure is just a natural extension of that
> > > architecture.

> > If the idea is that every XULRunner app apart from Firefox is built by
> > pulling from 2 (or more) repositories - the core one and the
> > app-specific one - and combining the result, why not apply the same
> > logic to Firefox?

> Because that's a lot of work we don't need to do right now, and can't
> afford to do right now. Mozilla 2 is already under way and it needs a
> repository. We need working Firefox and XULRunner built on it.

In addition to the expediency argument, it's clear to me that a dream-
world where the core XULRunner and Gecko code is in one repository,
and Firefox is in another, symmetric with respect to other XUL apps,
is just that: a dream world. I'd like to pick on Gerv's "why not apply
the same logic" question a bit more (he can take it ;-).

Firefox is not "just another XUL app". Mozilla would do a disservice
to everyone in its community, not just "end users", if it pretended
otherwise. Firefox and XULRunner/Gecko are the big lever we have to
advance the web. And with the right fulcrum, we may be able to move
mountains. We cannot treat all XUL apps equally in practice, even in
an ideal world. Practically speaking, we are willing to couple Firefox
to the back end, as it is today, via unfrozen APIs.

We aspire to freeze all such APIs. But if we don't succeed by any
given release (e.g., Firefox 4 on top of Mozilla 2), then we will
couple front to back end within the new repository.

/be


 
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