:)

> modifications to MPL'd/NPL'd code must be made available

I assume you mean "modifications to MPL'd/NPL'd source code must be made available along with executable code", else it wouldn't be a free license. =)

The response article was interesting to read. And IMO, this system more perfect than a non-open source system :)

I get so ill of hearing the Mozilla death-knell no less than 2 (or so) months from beta time for a browser that will, and already is (developers are using it already) going to change the Internet (for the BETTER, I should specify) and how we see it.

It's really just the case of a journalist who A) isn't interested enough to get to the bottom himself or B) doesn't have time or C) is just plain lazy.

BTW, speaking of open-source, Eric Raymond, who helped convince Netscape to make Mozilla open, is part of an effort to convince Gateway to open source the Amiga OS. http://www.savetheamiga.org.uk/html/casecontents.html (Link sometimes works, sometimes doesn't)

I think Mike S. had a good point when he mentioned the pride of getting things right.

I'm not involved in the mozilla codebase, but I am a developer. And the transparency of the mozilla process (ie, no corporate shields), combined with developer assurances that they want to do this the 'right way' convince me that when mozilla finally hits beta, it will be a good thing

btw, I'm on M10 and can't believe how sweet of an *alpha* product it is. I've seen worse betas in my lifetime, that's for sure...

MozAdmin - do you have any statistics you could make public about the browsers being used at Mozillazine? I think it would be quite interesting for everybody (preferably split by month over the past few months so we can see a pattern).

I for one was using an M11 build (18/10) all day yesterday, and I still would be if it would start up. Can anyone help here - it started when I tried loading loads of the other execuatbles to see what they do. Viewer.exe used to work but now crashes on launch, everything else just loads then quits. I have deleted the registry.

Thanks, Lemming

OK, this seems to be a fine, measured response to a slovenly piece of work, but where besides Mozillazine was this open(?) letter sent?

Did it go to Computerworld? If not, I'd have to suggest sending it there: they have as much obligation to publish it as they have journalistic integrity.

The letter can't do much good if it is only in Mozillazine (see, "Preaching to the Choir"). It's the world outside the open source movement that needs this information. For that matter, the letter should probably go to all the leading computer magazines dealing with PCs.

If I understand the directions on this form correctly, I can only leave my URL within the text: pschuman@skypoint.com

Hi,

The largest problem of Mozilla is IMHO the time it needs to get an beta/final version. In the meantime our friends at Redmond are defining the XML standards and are occupying the desktops with IE and XML developer guidelines. Also, they don't have any incentive to use Java 1.2 and Netscape isn't using it either. In the end, 1999 is a year of unchallanged M$ ruling of the Web Space and the future standards of the web. Sorry, but maybe a less than "right" version of Mozilla would be helpfull.

Walter

I found both the article and the response interesting. But I must remark that Mozilla is not the only product with sugnificant delays. Can you say [cough]Windows 2000[cough]?