Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 22:33:32 +0200 From: Jeremy Lea <reg@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Joe Kelsey <joek@mail.flyingcroc.net> Cc: freebsd-gnome <freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Mozilla 1.1 is stable *not* devel. Message-ID: <20020904203332.GA20743@shale.csir.co.za> In-Reply-To: <3D762C1D.4090609@flyingcroc.net> References: <3D762C1D.4090609@flyingcroc.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 08:51:57AM -0700, Joe Kelsey wrote:
> If you actually *read* the roadmap, it clearly shows a twin-track
> approach to mozilla development, *both* tracks being *stable* releases.
I don't know which roadmap you're reading, but you obviously don't follow or
understand Mozilla development. 1.1 is an unstable development release.
There will be no more releases on the 1.1 branch. 1.0 was their first API
freeze, and consumers of the mozilla.org code have been encouraged to follow
that branch.
As such I think that the chosen port names are ideal. Names like mozilla10,
etc. just lead to repo bloat, because they eventually have to be copied or
moved.
Remember, mozilla.org does not release browsers for public consumption.
They are for testing purposes only. Because we happen to have no better
browser is our problem... Stability for mozilla.org is defined in terms of
the API, not the MTBF.
Regards,
-Jeremy
--
FreeBSD - Because the best things in life are free...
http://www.freebsd.org/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-gnome" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020904203332.GA20743>