Minutes of the mozilla.org Staff Meeting of Wednesday 19th March 2003
Tuesday March 25th, 2003
The minutes of the mozilla.org staff meeting of Wednesday 19th March 2003 are now online. Issues discussed include 1.3.1, 1.4, Calendar and anonymous access to the mozilla.org website CVS tree.
I don't understand the thing about gcc:
gcc 2.95.3 (and perhaps 3.2.2) Linux builds for 1.4 alpha Definitely 3.2.2 by beta This raises our minimum system requirement to RH 7.1.
Will >= RH 7.1 now be required to run/compile Moz? What is the current requirement?
"ActiveX and XSLT work going in for alpha"
Ummm, I'm guessing that this has to do with the embedded activeX component. Or have I missed something and this is regarding true blue Active X support (something that I find hard to believe). Or is it something else yet?
There is both a Mozilla ActiveX Control (allow Mozilla to be embedded as an ActiveX component) and a Mozilla ActiveX Plugin (run ActiveX controls in Mozilla) under development.
The Meta bug (Bug 190852) tracking the ActiveX Plugin is: <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=190852>
There doesn't appear to be a Meta bug for tracking the ActiveX Control.
Does this mean I'll be able to go to <http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/> in Mozilla/Netscape? That's one of two reasons why I still fire up IE (the other being to access Lotus Notes over the web, as per Bug 138178). I'm psyched to be 100% gecko soon!
#5 Re: Windows Update
by willll <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Tuesday March 25th, 2003 2:20 PM
Windows Update will never work in Mozilla. Not only does it use ActiveX, but it also uses VBScript and other junk. Also, the last time I checked out hte ActiveX plugin it didn't work at all for me.
#9 Amazed and saddened about the support of ActiveX
by PaulB <email@example.com>
Tuesday March 25th, 2003 6:31 PM
I am amazed Mozilla would include ActiveX. My belief is that Mozilla should not support technology which requires a specific platform/OS. This also goes contrary to the goal (I always thought Mozilla supported) of helping the keep the web/internet platform/OS/browser independent.
I am very saddened and disappointed that Mozilla has given up one of its ideals and has supported ActiveX which requires Windows to function. Mozilla has made a huge mistake in my opinion by supporting ActiveX. (And I didn't even get into the security risks of ActiveX).
I don't know what 'minutes' these were supposed to be. According to Merrian-Websters dictionary, the minutes of a meeting are, "the official record of the proceedings of a meeting." These are _not_ minutes of the meeting -- more like a summary! For example, what do they mean by, "Cookie reworking is halfway done"? Come on guys, you want to give minutes, give me the minutes -- not some half-ass summary!
there's no reason why the official record of the proceedings can't be a summary. it's not uncommon for minutes to be a summary... these summaries are enough for people that know the project to work out what was being discussed. if you want more detail on something, ask in a post here and someone will probably know.
having these summaries is much better than having nothing, which is probably the alternative...
#10 Re: What minutes?
Tuesday March 25th, 2003 6:56 PM
"For example, what do they mean by, 'Cookie reworking is halfway done'?"
They're referring to bug 187304. <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=187304>
"Come on guys, you want to give minutes, give me the minutes -- not some half-ass summary!"
It's entirely possible that the actual discussion about the cookie rewrite wasn't much more than this. Imagine the following hypothetical dialogue:
A: So what are some of the things we've still got to land for 1.4 Alpha?
B: Well, there's the reworking of Mozilla's cookie code.
A: Oh, yeah? How's that going?
B: It's about half-finished. It'll be going in for alpha.
A: Great. Next up...
Remember that these are project management meetings, not really technical meetings. And in any case, most of the information about the cookie rewrite is out there if you search.
Chill, dude :-) OK, so it's a summary, rather than minutes. But, at the moment, it's all you are getting. :-)
What does that mean?