Mama Cass Elliot wrote:
>>We have over 15,279 open Bugzilla bug reports on
>>the Browser, MailNews, NSS, PSM and NSPR components. You're saying we
>>shouldn't tag the source tree with a 1.0 label until all of those are
>>fixed?!?
>>
>
> Conceptually, yes - I'm suggesting exactly that!
>
> However, I would also suggest that *provided* ALL implemented features work
> as intended, and provided ALL aspects of Mozilla are FULLY standards
> compliant - resulting in the end user being able to confidently use a
> stable, reliable, complete (in that all aspects of the programme
> are fully functional) programme, then Mozilla would be ready for a 1.0.0
> release.
>
> Mozilla MUST be absolutely rock solid stable, and must look good, and must
> behave well.
>
> Anything less than this would result in Mozilla's reputation going the same
> way as what Netscape's did - a reputation for poor software!
Netscape never had a reputation for solid software in the first place.
NS6 is actually a huge improvement relative to their last major release.
As for "no known bugs", that's a standard that almost no non-trivial
software has ever met. Worse, making last-minute changes to fix minor
known bugs has a tendency to create major unknown bugs. Microsoft
doesn't way for the bug lists to empty, Opera doesn't, and Mozilla
won't, either.
Remember when Windows 2000 was released? It was one of Microsoft's most
stable and reliable OS releases ever, despite a list of over 60000 known
issues. Numbers like that sound big, but they don't necessarily
translate into bad software.
--
http://www.classic-games.com/ http://www.indie-games.com/
I've often thought intelligence agencies should recruit idiots, as
idiots seem able to infiltrate any group in large numbers.
