Firefox 3.6 Beta 1 - proposed schedule, feedback requested!

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Mike Beltzner

unread,
Sep 30, 2009, 4:03:40 PM9/30/09
to mozilla.dev.planning group
As discussed in today's delivery meeting[1], we've put together a
proposal for the Firefox 3.6 Beta 1 schedule:

Oct 5 : Code freeze late evening PDT
Oct 6 : Start build1 of the beta assuming trees are green
Oct 7 : Begin QA testing (or earlier as builds become available)
Oct 13 : Complete QA testing by AM, ship beta in late day PDT

This requires an aggressive push on our remaining P1 blockers:

* there are > 80 unresolved on mozilla-1.9.2 [2]
* only 25 or so are not already fixed on mozilla-central or
tracemonkey [3]
* of those, only a handful don't already have patches or are waiting
to land

Please review the lists below and if you are assigned to or are
reviewing one of the blockers, take some time to take the appropriate
action (land on mozilla-1.9.2, complete your review, follow up on
review comments, etc). If you think that it's unfeasible for you to be
finished by Monday next week, please let me know now - there is no
shame, we're building estimates and timelines, and this is my
assessment after spending some time with the bug lists. You guys know
the bugs, themselves.

We'll revisit this estimate on Thursday evening based on the feedback
I collect.

cheers,
mike

[1]: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/DeliveryMeetings/2009-09-30
[2]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20flag%3Ablocking-firefox3.6%2B%2Cblocking1.9.2%2B%20-status1.9.2:fixed,unaffected,wontfix%20-P2
[3]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=OPEN%20flag%3Ablocking-firefox3.6%2B%2Cblocking1.9.2%2B%20-status1.9.2:fixed,unaffected,wontfix%20-P2%20-sw:fixed-in-tracemonkey

Axel Hecht

unread,
Sep 30, 2009, 4:16:10 PM9/30/09
to
I guess we'll chat over the next days in person, but I'll be taking my
weekend on Monday and Tuesday, so I'll have limited connectivity to land
the latest changesets. I guess we should be good by Sunday, let's hope
the tubes are all up :-)

I'll be back in my office tuesday night, in case all things fail.

Axel

Juan Becerra

unread,
Sep 30, 2009, 5:04:31 PM9/30/09
to Mike Beltzner, mozilla.dev.planning group
I'm wondering if we should release to beta as soon as in-house QA
completes some basic tests, at the level of smoke testing, for example,
and while the beta is out we could complete a series of full functional
tests across all platforms. It something similar to what we did for
3.5beta99.

juanb

> _______________________________________________
> dev-planning mailing list
> dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-planning
>

Nick Thomas

unread,
Oct 1, 2009, 5:09:09 PM10/1/09
to Juan Becerra, Mike Beltzner, mozilla.dev.planning group
Juan Becerra wrote:
> I'm wondering if we should release to beta as soon as in-house QA
> completes some basic tests, at the level of smoke testing, for example,
> and while the beta is out we could complete a series of full functional
> tests across all platforms. It something similar to what we did for
> 3.5beta99.
>
> juanb

I checked with Juan exactly what he meant, since "beta" is so overloaded
as a word, and we often enable updates separately from the official
release. In this case I believe he's advocating a short QA period and
then release it to the world all the ways we can.

-Nick

Alexander Limi

unread,
Oct 1, 2009, 8:18:52 PM10/1/09
to dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org
Whatever and however we do it, let's not ever call it b99 again.

Several of my tech-savvy friends thought someone had hacked our update
server, called me about it, etc — and proceeded to manually look for a new
version of Firefox from our servers.

It was a case of breaking expectations and confusing people in a weird
manner. While the outcome might have been desirable, we should have a
different execution this time.

--
Alexander Limi · Firefox User Experience · http://limi.net

Gen Kanai

unread,
Oct 4, 2009, 11:12:48 PM10/4/09
to Alexander Limi, dev-pl...@lists.mozilla.org

On Oct 2, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Alexander Limi wrote:

> Whatever and however we do it, let's not ever call it b99 again.

Absolutely agreed. Let's never do that again. It was particularly
confusing for users in Asia who often have less information to go on
in their own language and led to lots of confusion regarding the
authenticity of that strangely-numbered-beta.

Gen

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages