2015-06-15 18:05 GMT+02:00 Jean Chevalier <jchevalier at gmx.net>: > What I'm thinking now is to what extent the developer who put up the > Mozilla wiki page was entitled to put up opinions and statements either > expressed or implied about a third-party product on behalf of the Mozilla > Foundation (though is that the same Foundation that pays the Consortium > member fee?).
The mozilla wiki contains informations useful to contributors to the mozilla codebase and more generally "mozillians", it's not intended to be a global resource of information like wikipedia, nor any kind of official documentation on how to use libraries. It's targeted to code written against the Mozilla codebase and it's not even in the official MDN. The document you pointed at was created some time ago, cause we had a problem with developers taking "the easy way" too often, when they needed a store they just used SQLite (or better mozStorage, our wrapper) because the API was nice and already available, without doing any kind of analysis of their needs. The title was (likely) chosen explicitly negative to make people read the article and clarify the point before going deep into details. And it helped, now people ask what's the best store for their kind of workflow, and clearly SQLite is still a used option. Please don't attach any kind of negative bias to a wiki article, it's just a technical article about possible pitfalls our developers will hit (and have hit) if they don't think what they are doing. Nothing more than that. SQLite is used extensively in every single Mozilla product, so what? . The contents of the page came out from actual bugs and misuses we hit in years of use and experience with it and were discussed with attention. Most also have workarounds or suggested fixes. Honestly I just think you are giving too much importance to a technical document with a clear target and very well expressed points, rather than to the fact SQLite is happily used everywhere. It should just be used properly, not randomly.
