Niko Pavlicek wrote:
>
> Ben Bucksch wrote:
>
> > Let's look at the nominations, too. We introduced them to see, what the
> > community considers important for a release.
> >
> > Of course, the nominations only thell half of the stry, since people
> > can't say "don't fix this bug and rather ship earlier", but it does give
> > an impression. IMO, pushing out a bug with a nomination <= mozilla1.0
> > should/must be funded with rationals other then "we are overworked".
> > (Since we are trying to define Mozilla 1.0, the logical answer to "We
> > are overwroked" would be "Then push out the release".)
I agree.
> another point are the votes for bugs. IMO all the often voted bugs
> should be fixed, say all bugs with >= 5 votes, which is currently a list
> of 309 bugs (of which some are tracking bugs):
I don't agree. Some much-voted-for bugs are feature work that no-one has
volunteered to do before Mozilla 1.0. Holding up the declaration for those
would be silly. Also, what the public wants and what the public gets are
often two very different things, for a variety of reasons. ;-)
Gerv
