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.]

#36 Criteria for 1.0

by pallando <>

Wednesday June 27th, 2001 7:24 AM

You are replying to this message

Gerv has asked what our criteria should be for choosing when something is ready to go out the door as Mozilla 1.0

There are many things I\'d like to see get into a release as soon as possible (email encryption, jabberzilla, mathml), but they arn\'t relevant to Gerv\'s question.

When we label a rease as 1.0 we are saying two things.

1. We are saying to potential users \"This is no longer Beta software. We want you to use this release, and give our word that it is fit for using as your main workaday browser.\"

2. We are saying to potential plugin developers and website writers: \"This is now stable software. Anything we put out the door from now on is going to be backwardly compatible with this release. You are safe to go ahead and develop to these technologies and APIs.\"

From this, I\'d have thought it obvious what our criteria need to be:

1. Benchmark the Mozilla user experience against other leading browsers (IE 6.5, Opera, Netscape 4.x). Round up some novice internet users (your old granny) and monitor 100 hours of use. What\'s the average number of crashes? The average time to load a page? The average time to learn a new feature? Create a metric from these numerical criteria that best approximates The User Experience. And don\'t call it 1.0 until the Mozilla user experience is at least 95% as good as the best.

2. Freeze the APIs and include all technologies that you have advocated that developers _should_ use as the way to do things that they can already do with IE 6.5