mozilla.governance Google Group

Re: Bugzilla and localizations components/products

l...@mozilla.com (Axel Hecht) — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:16:01 UT

There is [link] claiming
the opposite, at least to some extent.
Head over to any bug on bmo, and then use the drop down for switching it
to a different product. That drop-down is not restricted by
classification, so that drop-down would increase by some 80-100 entries.

Re: Bugzilla and localizations components/products

g...@mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 16:53:46 UT

Yes, this is true. Sorry - there's no good fix for that. Unless we
decide to make all the German-related l10n components have the same QA
contact.
You'd need to ask the Bugzilla developers that.
You mean that it's only possible to change what someone is watching if
you are that person? That sounds like a feature, not a bug...

Re: Bugzilla and localizations components/products

l...@mozilla.com (Axel Hecht) — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:15:32 UT

Raising the thread from the attic. I took the quiet time to play a
little with the test install that Gerv set up for me.
One thing I found is that watcher of watchers don't work. So the
per-locale-cross-product and the cross-locale-per-product watchers
aren't working. People interested in say, all German bugs or all web

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

ka...@kairo.at (Robert Kaiser) — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 13:26:08 UT

Mitchell Baker schrieb:
Consumers usually enter the brand/product name in a search engine, they
don't care if it's on a .org or .com domain name.
Some enter one of ".com because all commercial products are .com" or
".org because all open source software is .org" but they don't care if
the browser magically switches that suffix while displaying the correct

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

mitch...@mozilla.com (Mitchell Baker) — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 01:37:56 UT

Content that is aimed at consumers -- people using our products --
should be where they are most likely to look for it. That might be a
.org site, or it might be something else - .com, it might be .foo, whatever.
Routing consumers to any particular site because it fits our view of how
we want the world to be is a good path to losing people.

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

g...@mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:50:38 UT

That makes sense, and appears to be what has been done with
air.mozilla.org. Although currently we have .org 301 redirecting to .com
rather than the other way around.
I agree.
Gerv

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

fantasai.li...@inkedblade.net (fantasai) — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:34:32 UT

I'm strongly in favor of declaring one to be the canonical address and sending
a 301 Permanent Redirect from the other. Having both be valid is confusing,
presents problems with certificates, and also dilutes search results so relevant
pages get duplicated in the results or don't get ranked as highly as they should.

Re: Commit Access Policy v0.3

ka...@kairo.at (Robert Kaiser) — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 16:01:53 UT

Sounds good.
I wonder if we should list SeaMonkey and calendar in the "core product"
description, just for clarity.
Robert Kaiser

Re: Commit Access Policy v0.3

l...@mozilla.com (Axel Hecht) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:13:42 UT

Sounds good to me. I'm not sure if the l10n-drivers repos at
[link] need special documentation. Though they'd
technically fit into 1a, named voucher, too.
Axel

Commit Access Policy v0.3

g...@mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:04:44 UT

The general feedback on the first draft of the unified Commit Access
Policy was that "even simpler is OK".
So here is an updated draft:
[link]
There are now 3 levels, with no subdivisions within the levels,
excepting that l10n, NSPR and NSS are their own areas.
Comments are very welcome in the "governance" newsgroup/mailing list.

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

ka...@kairo.at (Robert Kaiser) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:40:15 UT

Right, and I think we should, over time, move to having everything that
is not Firefox-specific to have .org as the primary sites. We are a
public-benefit community, no matter if some "Corporation" is
contributing to it, so .org is what most people would expect, I guess.
And open source projects are usually expected to be .org in any case.

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

davidwbosw...@yahoo.com (davidwboswell) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:13:34 UT

This certainly seems to be worth considering for at least some sites.
Even with the .com/.org redirects in place we are still confusing
things with air.mozilla.com and planet.mozilla.org, for instance. I
don't know enough about the certificate issue though to know what's
possible here.
David

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

mike.sha...@gmail.com (Mike Shaver) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:52:41 UT

Yeah, because:
Yes.
Mike

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

a...@pike.org (Axel Hecht) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:10:30 UT

I wonder if we should serve the sites from both domains or should
declare one of the two to be the primary site, and redirect from the other.
I personally find it confusing whenever I'm trying to go to
people.mozilla.org/com. It might make it harder to talk about sites,
too. "I'm on foo.mozilla.com", "No, go to foo.mozilla.org", "I don't see

Re: "One Mozilla" Domain Name Policy

davidwbosw...@yahoo.com (davidwboswell) — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:20:30 UT

No problem. I think resolving those things are certainly important
and I'm happy to work with you to put together a proposal to run by
the support groups if you'd like.
David