Wednesday September 20th, 2000
Lots of happenings at mozilla.org in the past few days, with a new roadmap up for review, and a new checkin policy, in force. Both are plans for the future of mozilla following Mozilla .9 and Netscape 6.
In a nutshell, Netscape and Mozilla will branch soon, and all Netscape 6/Mozilla .9 work will be on that branch, while the trunk rolls towards a Mozilla 1.0 release. The new reviewer rules are now in effect, and require you to still get a peer review and module owner approval, and along with those a super review from the reviewers group at mozilla.org.
Along with all that, there is a new status update now up, with a variety of updates on what has been happening over the last week.
#1 very cool roadmap
Thursday September 21st, 2000 1:16 AM
The whole .9 branch thing evades me, but this is nice because it shows just how close a 1.0 is after all this time.
#9 Re: very cool roadmap
Thursday September 21st, 2000 10:34 AM
Q2 2001 is "soon" for Mozilla 1.0? That's six months away.
#11 Re: Re: very cool roadmap
Thursday September 21st, 2000 1:01 PM
>>Q2 2001 is "soon" for Mozilla 1.0? That's six months away.
last I heard, there's a substantial difference between Mozilla 1.0 and Netscape 6, with Netscape 6 supposed to arrive before the year's out.
#14 Re: Re: Re: very cool roadmap
Thursday September 21st, 2000 3:13 PM
I think we've all seen what we can expect from the Netscape releases. They will be pushed out without regard to quality. I am assuming the first somewhat solid release will be Mozilla 1.0.
#13 Mozilla 0.9 and Mozilla 1.0
Thursday September 21st, 2000 3:07 PM
As you probably know, Mozilla and Netscape have pretty different audiences. I'll leave it to Netscape to give a description of their Customers/Users/Audience (I dont' want to speak for them) and hopefully the Netscape 6 product will satisfy that audience. Mozilla has as it's primary audience developers. It is our intention to release a Mozilla 1.0 that addresses the needs of this audience. This means things like fotprint, a broader set of APIs, embedding issues, etc. Mozilla in not there yet. But we'd also like to have a release/source tag that coincides with the Netscape 6 product which whill be used by millions of end users so that folks working on mathML and similar projects can build 'drop-in' components that will just 'work' in the Netscape 6 product. This is the reason for having a Mozilla 0.9 Hope this helps clarify it some.
-Asa (you know it, posted with Mac Mozilla)
#23 Re: Mozilla 0.9 and Mozilla 1.0
Sunday September 24th, 2000 1:37 AM
For myself, it is the better XML support and most important the support for Mathml and SVG. Will this also go to both or will it stay only in SeaMonkey (which is okay by me) steve
#2 "Thumbs Up" people are on crack!
Thursday September 21st, 2000 3:41 AM
Hey, the last two nightlies of Win32 Mozilla did not even load in Win98. Both had a "thumbs up." If you're gonna go through all the trouble of rating the nightlies at least take the time to actually check them out, and if you didn't, DON'T give them a thumbs up (come up with some other symbol that says "Dunno"). This system is worse than nothing! Alternately, let users post comments. Mozilla is getting big and many of us have better things to do with a phone line.
Thursday September 21st, 2000 5:49 AM
Well, the last two nightlies have worked fine on NT4. Try deleting the old files under bin before installing the new ones. Just because you\'re having problems it doesn\'t immediately mean that everyone else is.
#5 same here
Thursday September 21st, 2000 8:26 AM
The nightly builds have been broken for me for about a week. And YES I did delete ALL the files (I always do). There's a splash window, then it disappears and nothing. I usually just use the zip archive, but I tried the installler - still nothing. I went back to M17 and THAT works. I've run around this process about 15 times since I (used to) use Mozilla for web page design (just checking on the browser, I don't use composer). So yes, for some of us these nightly's no longer work despite the reviews
Thursday September 21st, 2000 9:56 AM
Well, I\'ve also been running it without problems on my Win95 box at home. Maybe you should try running it with -console, you see if you get any clues from what it outputs there. It\'s surprising it doesn\'t work though as recent nightlies have been pretty solid. One other thing you could try is deleting all the directories with jar files of the same name (they just duplicate the content of the jar files).
Thursday September 21st, 2000 10:29 AM
I think you have to delete directory windows/Application Data/Mozilla and mozregistry.dat moz*.* Mozilla Works For me win98SE
Thursday September 21st, 2000 12:06 PM
Well so far nothing works... still. As was suggested I left the User50 directory (didn't work). Tried a few other combinations between them (didn't work), cleaned everything out and tried again (and it still didn't work). I also got an interesting error once or twice: "R6016 - not enough space for thread data", after which mozilla dies. I've noticed that lately a mozilla directory pops up in the windows directory. Well I nuked that. I killed anything with mozilla on it in the windows directory. And there is no entry in the windows/Application Data directory (so I'm not sure what that guy was talking about). Since Mozilla seems to be throwing around lots of undocumented files I searched my system for moz* and even ran regedit and looked at everything in the registry. I reformatted my hard drive 2 months ago, so this is as "clean" as Windows 95 gets (well it's got the general M$ "issues" but I don't have any other problems with any other programs).
So needless to say, none of that worked and more or less I am just hosed. Thanks for the suggestions. I guess if anyone else has an idea I'll give that a whirl too. Guess once the rest of the world starts talking about Mozilla, I'll be the one that was messing with it before it became the hot new software, but mysteriously can't use it anymore (ooh irony!). Well I'll try the nightly in a week and see. Maybe M18 will work so who knows, but if Mozilla 1.0 doesn't work I'll have to go to M$IE for sure. God knows what I'll do for an e-mail client. What's Opera up to these days?
Well it all looks good on Linux at least!
#12 Re: nope
Thursday September 21st, 2000 1:27 PM
I'm sure everyone would love to help with this, so have you filed a bug? Or looked to see what bug number this could be? MozillaZine talkback is not the place to report bugs. If you want to see traction on this issue, search for an open bug or file a new one.
As far as the build bar is concernedit gets it's info from people who download and use mozilla everyday. If you want better representation in the comments, feel free to join irc.mozilla.org/#mozillazine and share your thoughts on the builds.
#17 Re: nope
Friday September 22nd, 2000 10:52 AM
I couldn't get the recent nightlys to work either. Then I found that if you were using a third party theme on your old build, then the new build won't start. The splash screen comes up, then nothing. I filed bug 53670 last night. Work-around is to make sure that you are using one of the 3 Mozilla themes before you try to install the latest nightly or edit user-skins.rdf to one of the stock themes.
#22 It's a bug 53353
Sunday September 24th, 2000 1:12 AM
#30 Re: It's a bug 53353
Tuesday September 26th, 2000 4:52 PM
I found the problem file in bug 53353. Just copy xpcom.dll from the 0919 build to the latest nightly, untill the thread flush is fixed.
#33 which one?
Saturday September 30th, 2000 2:18 PM
Hi There are four 0919 at the link below, which one? They start with 2000 of course then goes 091902, 091908 ect.
#34 Re: which one?
Saturday September 30th, 2000 3:13 PM
I took a chance and downloaded 20000091924 and copied it. It seems to have done the trick my 2000092408 Mathml-SVG enabled is Working great Next problem thou is these are zipped files with no profile manager I don't like having the user profile on my boot plate with windows. It is full enough.
Thursday September 21st, 2000 10:16 AM
..look at my other post on this subject, i had exactly the same prob.. try running M17 and a Nightly along side..
Thursday September 21st, 2000 6:54 AM
..urgh.. if your havin' probs read the install instructions (for M17) on the mozilla site, dont jump to conclusions. I had the same problem for quite a few builds, tried deleting the mozilla registry and user files. Didn't work, so i installed Milestone 17, and in a different directory a nightly that didnt work (4th one in a row) 'n, suddenly, all worked fine when starting the Nightly build. You ofcourse can delete the M17 "bin" directory since your using the nightly build binaries, however only do this _after_ you run M17 once, so it makes the mozilla registry and user files which the nightly will takeover automaticly. So dont delete the "Users50" directory.
#15 re: "Thumbs Up" people are on crack!
Thursday September 21st, 2000 3:45 PM
LighrtenUp, I appreciate your frustration. Most of us have been where you are at one point (or more) during our involvement with the project. I am sorry to hear that you are having this difficulty and would be glad to help you get it worked out (email me, file a bug and cc: me on it, or stop in at #mozillazine on IRC).
As far as taking the time to actually test these builds, I do. I download builds on 3 platforms usually twice a day. So do the dozen or so other people I talk to before posting to the BuildBar. I also read all the recent bug reports (hundreds a week) filed to see what kinds of problems people are running into. I also read a dozen or so newsgroups looking for issues. I spend quite a bit of time working with win32, mac and linux Mozilla builds and try to pass on some of my experiences here at the buildbar and in the Read More comments page, often linking to pertinent bugs or explaining recent changes. If you would like to have a say in what goes up at the buildbar please email me or let me know on IRC. I'm availble from about 10am Pacific time until about 7PM. I try to update the buildbar at about Noon (this varies depending on the timing of the daily builds and the time it takes me to test all three of them) so if you would like to comment on problems in a dialy build the best thing is to file a bug and let m know about it on IRC or through email before noon.
Not being able to ger Mozilla to start is frustrating. I hope that your issue is resolved soon.
#16 Thanks Asa!
Thursday September 21st, 2000 8:34 PM
Just wanted to say thanks for putting in all the time to keep it updated. I know how hard it is to try to keep anything online updated consistantly...
Running the nightly from the 19th as that one sounded pretty safe, and is working really well. One or two minor annoyances, but I'm really amazed at the progress of Mozilla lately. I finally switched over to it from Netscape 4.7 for my daily surfing. =)
So thanks Asa =) Shawn
#19 Thanks 2
Friday September 22nd, 2000 11:32 AM
So far, AD has been right on the money every time. I'm starting to use 2000091905 as my everyday browser, and things are looking VERY good.
Interesting idea, that Netscape 6 will be based on Mozilla 0.9: just as long as Netscape 6.1 (rather than, say, Netscape 6.01) is based on Mozilla 1.0 and the M0.9 branch does die eventually.
#18 Thumbs Up
Friday September 22nd, 2000 11:28 AM
Have you rejected the idea of a numerical rating (say 1-5, with e.g. the 2000091905 build being a 5, and anything below 3 being a thumbs-down)? I know it would be difficult to quantify . . .
Friday September 22nd, 2000 3:27 PM
I can\\\'t say I am happy right now.
I\\\'m running a nightly mozilla.org build, and what I have is called \\\"Netscape 6\\\", does not contain a Debug menu, has instead of the convenient open windows (although that disappeared quite a while ago) I have some drop-down menus commercial crap. And I certainly don\\\'t feel very comfortable with the \\\"Windows\\\'ish\\\" Classic skin.
#21 Re: Hrm.
Friday September 22nd, 2000 6:05 PM
This is noted in the buildbar Read More comments. There was some strange packaging problems that dumped some netscape stuff into the linux builds today (started last night actually). It should be gone soon. Note, though, that Classic is Mozilla's default and the only reason you're seeing modern as the default in the tar.gz linux builds is becasue Ben is having difficulty switching it in that build. All Installer Mozilla builds should have Classic as the defualt. (you can switch from the View|Apply Theme menu or the Themes preferences panel)
#24 Backslash problem...
Monday September 25th, 2000 1:58 AM
Odd - could you give me some specifics of how you posted? I'm seeing this backslash problem crop up only on a few posts, and I'm curious to know what's causing it - I thought I had fixed it.
#25 Re: Backslash problem...
Monday September 25th, 2000 4:01 AM
testing a theory:
don't don´t don`t
#26 Re: Re: Backslash problem...
Monday September 25th, 2000 4:02 AM
nope, that wasn't it.
Monday September 25th, 2000 2:21 PM
I believe I clicked SUBMIT with faulty login/pass, and then the blackslash's were there, incorrect login/pw again, and a second, a third
#29 Re: How
Tuesday September 26th, 2000 12:20 AM
Were you using one of the recent nightly builds by any chance?
#32 Re: How
Thursday September 28th, 2000 11:29 PM
Yes, that was it. In 4.x (not a Mozilla problem), just type characters that Mozillazine would escape (' or ", etc), and don't enter a login and password and it'll give you your error with your message, complete with escape characters converted to text. No need to actually submit your test comment.