> I think that mozilla.org's focus should not be on improving stable
> branches, but on taking the product forward. If individual contributors or
> contributing organisations wish to focus their resource on stable
> branches, that's cool, and we can reap the benefits.
Until there are more established organizations pushing products from mozilla
(ie, contributing a good portion of end-user recognizable code/clean-up,
doumentation, all the stuff that makes up a polished product) besides just
Netscape, who I think we will all admit isn't the best at judgement in this
area, considering 6.0 was a rubber-stamp of moz0.6 with not much added but
marketing cruft, we are forced to demand higher end results from the mozilla
organization. They must take a stewardship or leadership role in putting
out a quality release, and making sure after that one release, the trunk of
development doesnt sink back into a 1-2 year slump of post 1.0 "well, now we
should hack up this or that cause I have a brilliant idea on how to make
mozilla better, but oh ya, it will throw the product into chaos for another
6 months as we work out the bugs."
I see your point tho Gerv, but its going to take a while for 3rd parties to
really get things roling, if indeed they do. I can't see any coporate
entities adding anything of value ever besides branding a browser with there
own theme, so its left to open source projects, just like mozilla, and even
tho Galeon, K-meleon, and others, even those are going to take a long time
to gain the membership and noteriety to give anything of real value to the
end-user. So, it's Netscape 6.5, Mozilla 1.0, or back to nightlies which
are hits some days, and misses others.
My $0.02
MJ
