MCBastos wrote:
Interviewed by CNN on 07/08/2011 21:29, Paul B. Gallagher told the world:
MCBastos wrote:
But, the thing is, with limited resources available, supporting
those old releases means that the new release does not receive as
much work as it needs. With Seamonkey tied to the every-six-weeks
Mozilla release schedule, delaying release is not an option. So
supporting the old releases is no longer viable.
As our parents used to ask, "If everyone else jumped off a cliff, would
you do it, too?" Just because the FF people decided to rush things and
churn out a series of half-baked products for the sake of keeping up
with the Joneses, why should we ape them?
(and /please/ don't ask me to keep my metaphors straight)
I don't mind your mixed metaphors, but I DO resent your loaded question.
It's cheap rhetoric device devoid of content.
First of all, I reject the premise that FF would be "churning half-baked
products". This is simply not true. In fact, it has been argued that the
new rapid-release schedule IMPROVES quality, since each release goes
through twelve weeks of testing (Aurora and Beta stages) with *no new
features added*, just debugging. In the old scheme, there was always the
temptation to add new features with the product close to release, since
the next release would be maybe a year away. And sometimes those new
features *were* half-baked.
So how many weeks of pure debugging and actual test suite testing did
SM 2.1 receive (in addition to testing by the FF and TB team testing?
[keeping in mind that SM has lots of code filched from FF & TB])
Also with 'an expected release maybe a year away' why were the new
features half-baked previously? A year is surely long enough to test.
And how about 2.2 ? And how about 2.3 ?
And how about repairing in 2.2 bugs discovered after release in 2.1?
And in 2.3 repairing bugs from 2.1 and/or 2.2?
(There have, I admit, promises to repair in 2.4 or later, some problems
introduced in 2.1 :-) )
Second, Seamonkey does depend on Gecko and other Mozilla technologies.
SM 2.2 runs on Gecko 5. As soon as Firefox 6 is released, Gecko 5 stop
receiving security and stability patches. Which means that any
newly-discovered bugs on Gecko 5 (and therefore Seamonkey 2.2) will
remain unpatched.
Yes we know! we have been promised that.
So, yeah, we DO have to release SM 2.3 with Gecko 6, if we want to give
our users a secure browser. We don't have a team of Gecko experts to
backport new patches to Gecko 5.
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
