2003-08-18 - Summary of mozilla.org staff meeting

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Gervase Markham

unread,
Aug 21, 2003, 7:01:49 PM8/21/03
to st...@mozilla.org
2003-08-18 - Summary of mozilla.org staff meeting
-------------------------------------------------

Present: gerv, myk, seth, asa, chofmann, scc.
(mitchell, blizzard, brendan on vacation.)

*Foundation update*

- mscott and chofmann hired last Monday.
- Not 501c3 yet
- We chose meer.net for colo for the new servers.

*1.5 beta update*

- One bug outstanding (GDI issue)
- After release, about two more weeks on the trunk
- Branch for final with 5-12 bugs left.
- Not scheduled to branch until August 29th.

*Mozilla Firebird 0.7 update*

- There is a list of things that need to be implemented to get it to
replace Seamonkey. See Bugzilla targetted bugs.
- scott has been working on adding Send Page/Send Link etc.
- Toolkit forking/reorg is 95% done (pierre chianal).
- 0.7 from the 1.5 final branch.

*Thunderbird 0.2 update*

- Thunderbird 0.2 in a couple of weeks, max.
- mscott is raring to go.
- There is some effort to sync up the releases of FB and TB.

*Talkback*

- We want to keep this going.
- We still have access to current reports.
- There isn't yet an open-source alternative. :-(

*New test matrix*

- Asa is working on a test matrix for shipping milestones.
- Currently 3 sets of docs - smoketest list, test plans, test cases.
- He is building a new master list of all tests.
- Eventually there'll be an automated tool.

*1.4 branch (1.4.1)*

- 1.4's focus is the fix for Windows installer crashes, and the GDI
leaks.
- Windows installer crashes are fixed on the branch.
- GDI thing fixed, maybe - still looking into this.
- We've also taken other fixes meantime.

*Other*

- Also making changes to make 1.5 more user-friendly (e.g. search
plugins.)

Brant Langer Gurganus

unread,
Aug 21, 2003, 8:12:38 PM8/21/03
to
Gervase Markham wrote:

> *Talkback*
>
> - We want to keep this going.
> - We still have access to current reports.
> - There isn't yet an open-source alternative. :-(

Some searching yielded the following open source possibilities:
<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2002-06/msg00143.html>


--
Brant Langer Gurganus
QA Volunteer


Brant Langer Gurganus

unread,
Aug 22, 2003, 11:21:28 PM8/22/03
to
Brant Langer Gurganus wrote:

> Gervase Markham wrote:
>
>> *Talkback*
>>
>> - We want to keep this going.
>> - We still have access to current reports.
>> - There isn't yet an open-source alternative. :-(
>
>
> Some searching yielded the following open source possibilities:
> <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2002-06/msg00143.html>
>
>

I also found another possibility in vRoach. I sent the details of that
to st...@mozilla.org.

Andrew Schultz

unread,
Aug 23, 2003, 1:15:19 AM8/23/03
to

Openoffice's crash reporter or gnome's bugbuddy seem like more viable alternatives.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216827

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Schultz | The views expressed might
ajsc...@eos.ncsu.edu | not represent those of NCSU.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~ajschult/ | They are however, correct.

Christian Biesinger

unread,
Aug 23, 2003, 7:17:10 AM8/23/03
to
Andrew Schultz wrote:
> Openoffice's crash reporter or gnome's bugbuddy seem like more viable
> alternatives.
> http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216827


At least gnome's bug-buddy requires shipping binaries with symbols, that
would increase the download size a lot.

Henri Sivonen

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 3:17:33 AM8/24/03
to
In article <W2I1b.34252$gX4.3...@news.chello.at>,
Christian Biesinger <cbies...@web.de> wrote:

> At least gnome's bug-buddy requires shipping binaries with symbols, that
> would increase the download size a lot.

Shipping with symbols is power user-friendly. It makes it easier to
figure out what went wrong. The OS X builds already ship with symbols.

--
Henri Sivonen
hsiv...@iki.fi
http://www.iki.fi/hsivonen/
Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html

Christian Biesinger

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 3:58:24 PM8/24/03
to
Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Shipping with symbols is power user-friendly. It makes it easier to
> figure out what went wrong.

Yes, I know. But it increases the download size. As I recently read in a
bug comment, all the footprint effort is mostly for reducing the
firebird download size. Under that light, I doubt that an increase in
size will be accepted.

Simon Paquet

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 4:50:52 PM8/24/03
to

I don't think that this is the only reason. Footprint reduction, be it
code footprint, memory footprint or disk footprint is always a viable
goal, because it makes the code more manageable (code footprint
reduction) and enables Mozilla to run better on older or embedded
systems (disk and memory footprint reduction). So I believe, that the
efforts for footprint reduction would have been taken with or without
the existence of firebird.

Ciao
Simon
--
Aufgrund der aktuellen wirtschaftlichen Situation ist diese
Stelle zur Zeit leider nicht besetzt.

Christian Biesinger

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 6:51:34 PM8/24/03
to
Simon Paquet wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 19:58:24 GMT, Christian Biesinger wrote:
>>>Shipping with symbols is power user-friendly. It makes it easier to
>>>figure out what went wrong.
>>
>>Yes, I know. But it increases the download size. As I recently read in a
>>bug comment, all the footprint effort is mostly for reducing the
>>firebird download size. Under that light, I doubt that an increase in
>>size will be accepted.
>
> I don't think that this is the only reason. [...]

I didn't say it was the only one.

Anyway, my main point was: If one goal is to reduce firebird dl size,
putting symbols in won't help.

David Bradley

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 10:48:24 PM8/24/03
to
Christian Biesinger wrote:
> Anyway, my main point was: If one goal is to reduce firebird dl size,
> putting symbols in won't help.

And you're not talking a couple of megs here. It would be a sizable
increase, even zipped.

Sure you could provide an alternate build that people could choose to
download, but I think that would substantially reduce the number of
people providing crash data.

David

Matthias Versen

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 4:04:31 PM8/25/03
to
David Bradley wrote:

FYI:
Mozilla with symbols build, zipped with maximum compression :
40,7MB

Mozilla optimized without symbols :
10,9MB

Matthias

--
Please delete everything between "matti" and the "@" in my mail address.

joe

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 5:01:30 PM8/25/03
to
Matthias Versen wrote:
> David Bradley wrote:
>
>> Christian Biesinger wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway, my main point was: If one goal is to reduce firebird dl size,
>>> putting symbols in won't help.
>>
>>
>>
>> And you're not talking a couple of megs here. It would be a sizable
>> increase, even zipped.
>>
>> Sure you could provide an alternate build that people could choose to
>> download, but I think that would substantially reduce the number of
>> people providing crash data.
>
>
> FYI:
> Mozilla with symbols build, zipped with maximum compression :
> 40,7MB
>
> Mozilla optimized without symbols :
> 10,9MB
>
> Matthias
>
what is symbols?

Andrew Schultz

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 5:11:43 PM8/25/03
to
Matthias Versen wrote:
> FYI:
> Mozilla with symbols build, zipped with maximum compression :
> 40,7MB
>
> Mozilla optimized without symbols :
> 10,9MB

note that there are actually three levels that are relevant (at least on Linux,
not sure about Windows): stripped, unstripped, and with full symbols.
unstripped has basic stuff (function names), but no variables. unstripped is
generally not so big.

blizzard's RPMs used to be unstripped.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages