Full Article Attached Towards Mozilla 1.0

Tuesday June 26th, 2001

Gervase Markham recently posted his feelings on what a 1.0 release of Mozilla would be. Gerv has sent us the follow-up to that posting, including much of the feedback he received. To read it, click the full article link. Once you have read through it, we welcome you to post your feelings on what you think a 1.0 release would have. [As Gerv says, please don't post your favorite list of bugs, only the criteria for choosing what bugs to fix.]

#191 Defining criteria for 1.0 release.

by JBassford <>

Friday June 29th, 2001 10:59 AM

You are replying to this message

It would be unreasonable to think that everybody agreed on this subject.

As I see it there are 7 categories that have been thrown out, along with what each person sees as the order in which they should be prioritized. These categories follow, in alphabetical order:

Documentation Features Functionality Interface Stability Standards Speed

It has been asked that we respond with our personal opinions on the subject, but what is the actual scope of this question? It's well enough for us to all start typing but what's going to be done with this feedback?

1. Does anything we say have any REAL bearing on the project itself?

a) If the point of soliciting opinions is to figure out what people on this planet want from a Mozilla 1.0 release - then asking just the people in this forum is a waste of time. The question should be posed on a far wider scale, soliciting response from a much wider sample.

b) If the purpose of the original question was just to figure out what people who follow this particular forum think, fine.

2. How will our response be used?

a) The implication is that our feedback will (help) determine the decision criteria for a 1.0 release. Is this actually the case? If so, to what degree and in what manner?

b) Is this a way of taking our pulse in terms of Gerv's personal ideas about 1.0 or is it part of a broader effort to actually bring idea to the Power That Be? (My apologies for the wording.)

3. What criteria will be applied against our feedback?

a) It seems to me that a whole series of debate and free-flowing subjective replied will do no more than give an overal "feel" about what we think. If that's the purpose of the original question, that's fine - although I'm not quite sure what good that does the project itself, above and beyond some subjective testing of the waters.

b) If objective metrics are being sought, then it would be much better to withdraw the "open" form of question form resubmit it in the form of a poll. ("Rate these 7 areas of work in terms of the priority you think they should be given. Do you think that Mozilla should be 100% compliant with X prior to a 1.0 relase?", etc.) Then take the feedback, all of which would follow an objective standard of reply, put the numbers into a spreadsheet, and run some statistical analyses on them.

In other words, I can't really see the usefulness that will be gained from simply opening up a subjective, extremely small sample of discussion / debate / argument as has been done here.

If the point is to base Mozilla development on what people want to see - then feedback needs to be solicited in a much more organised and wide-spread fashion, not in a quick "one-off" manner that can't possibly (unless you're really lucky) result in understanding Mozillas eventual user base as a whole. The intentions here are good, but the implementation needs some work.