Man, when The List returns a zarro boogs, I'm gonna throw a party. :)

When the FF hits RC stage with zarro boogs, what will be the policy with checking in the bugs that weren't blockers but yet bugs and made it into aviary nonetheless? Are you gonna freeze aviary till 1.0 Final or... I am just wondering as some other fixes just might bring in some other unexpected problems right before the release and we may not catch them.

No PR 2? I think that the RC builds should be saved for genuine attempts at releases before 1.0. I think Firefox should remain a PR version until it is felt the program could be released. I feel it still has some polish and bugs to work out.

So, RC won't be a change to test the builtin update-functionality?
If I wan't to test RC, can I just install it on top off PR, or will I have to uninstall PR first?

I wish they'd have made Bug 262854 a blocker. Having XPI installation break just because you disable cache is annoying and a big impact on Portable Firefox.

The words "zarro boogs" sound much better when pronounced with a Mexican accent. "zarro" as in "zorro" and "boogs" as in "dogs". Try it sometime :)

Well, enough silliness. Congratulations Firefox team!

Oh, so *that's* why I couldn't install extensions in Portable Firefox! Thanks John.

There are (at least) two annoying bugs that IMHO should be fixed before going 1.0:
History of Firefox is lost frequently without crash
Download manager fails to close with small files

My pet bugs are these...

Uninstalling deleted non-Firefox folders
... horrible if you're a victim of it.

IE favorites with non-western characters are not imported
... a problem for large parts of the world migrating from the world's most common browser.

Memory use does not go down after closing tabs
... annoying to see Fx use 80 MB in the task manager with, say, two tabs currently open. A bit bad publicity too.

There are a couple of [tested on trunk] requests in request queue that are waiting for approval.

It's a pity that the same effort doesn't seem to be being applied to Thunderbird - some major issues still to be sorted out on that product.

W.

Is the memory hugging issue fixed? :)

Party, shmarty... I personally don't get what's the big deal with this "zarro boogs" thing anyway.

As long as you stick to this simple algorithm, you can throw "zarro boogs" parties whenever you like :

// NOTE : pseudocode
Purify(ReleaseVer)
{
  if (boogs blocking ReleaseVer)
  {
    for (each boog that is blocking ReleaseVer)
    {
      boog.SetBlocks(ReleaseVer + 1);
    }
  }
}

Apply this to your bugs and voila : you have zarro boogs! PARTY TIME!!! Yippee!

I don't see why 2 simple bugs such as
the one where a broken image with no alt text dosen't show the broken image icon
and
the one where non-animated favicons that are over 16k in file size won't save to bookmark cache. [blocked by 252401]
won't be fixed before 1.0

these seem like 2 bugs that shouldn't exist, and would really confuse and create questions for someone new to firefox

Mozilla make some progress in printing, but still weak on the whole.
There are still some problems to print out background.

I am in favor of style sheet, but 185058 dispoints me.

185058 : Wrong scaling of css background images when printing page

> Uninstalling deleted non-Firefox folders
> ... horrible if you're a victim of it.
Cool! Next time he/she should install Firefox under C:\WINDOWS and then do an uninstallation!

Is this fixed?

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/19/0236213&tid=113&tid=128&tid=154&tid=218

it should be before 1.0 final, IMHO.

I cant see that "requests" link in that Walter K post.

re Thunderbird, once we have a working scheme for l10n on firefox, which we intensivly test with about 25 localisations now, we're gonna reuse that knowledge to do localized Thunderbirds. I'm not sure how prominent this is, but Thunderbird 1.0 will be a few (2) weeks after Firefox 1.0. So on the one hand, we're collecting *very* useful information about processes as we speak, on the other hand, the Thunderbird schedule isn't burning as hot as the Firefox one is.

Things on our FF plate include ironing out trademark issues as well as technical issues like tinderboxens and releasing builds. And we do find errors there that we shouldn't make again in the Thunderbird cycle. Or at least, we should know how to fix them ;-). I personally expect the Thunderbird experience to be much less painful for everybody involved than the Firefox one. Good news ahead.

Just to reply to Grunt, let me copy these lines out of Peter(6)'s excellent nightly build tracking thread on Mozillazine:

Bugs blocking Firefox 1.0 and FIXED = 349
Branch Fixes since FF1.0PR 20040913 = 276

Hardly the result of the algorithm you suggest.

Daniel :

As someone who apparently frequents "Firefox Builds" @MZine, I do believe you have familiarized yourself with this graph, right? (originally from here, of course). Assuming sensemann's graph isn't off the mark by more than a dozen or two bugs at any given point in time, tell me what's wrong with that picture. Or, no, better yet - don't tell me. I already know - I've been following Moz development for a lo-ong time...

No point in arguing, really - 'nuff said.

Well, lets see... The green goes up at a 70 or so degree incline... Yeah, that really does look like what you suggest...

Yes, I'm aware there was a great many bugs + -> -ed in one run Grunt, but that's because before that everything and it's brother was +ed. Don't confuse the cleanup with a systematic removal of all blocking flags everywhere. Frankly your implication that nothing was actually done is insulting to all the people who have been working to move an incredible number of bugs into the green column every day.

nentuaby :

> Frankly your implication that nothing was actually done
How about you quit making stuff up (slandering in the process), mate, and for a change READ others' posts. Then read your own post. Then read Asa's first sentence. Does it sink in yet?

If not, I can spell it out for you. In my - and every employer I ever worked for - book, if you define "zarro boogs" to mean "still many bugs, but I decided that I don't feel like fixing them" instead of "zero bugs", there's not much point in partying. You can celebrate other things : SHIPPING a MINOR, SUBMITTING a PATCH LEVEL for distribution, DELIVERING a SERVICE RELEASE to customers, whatever. But partying "zarro boogs" per se as per contemporary MoFo definition simply makes no sense, as that is nothing but a bitter misnomer. THAT is "my implication".

As a side note, calling a version of software a "release" (or "final" or "stable") when it is KNOWN to contain specific bugs (not feature requests, but bugs, bugs which are conveniently "scheduled" for fixing "later"... ) is simply a mockery. It demonstrates utter disrespect towards customers.

Grunt, I guess you and your employer have never shipped anything very complex. All complex software has bugs, known bugs, bugs that exist and are known before shipping. A Web browser is a very complex piece of software. The content it needs to be capable of handling is varied and, more often then not, buggy itself. If you can point me to a single piece of software as complex as Firefox which you believe shipped with zero known bugs, and you can demonstrate that to be true, I'll conceed your point. Until then, I have to assume you've never shipped anything very complex.

--Asa

Grunt, just to point to another example. Apache, the world's most successful (and secure) web server has nearly 6,000 open bugs in its bug database .

--Asa

As a light and meaningless comment...

Yes, Firefox has bugs, but so has (windows), and any bloody commercial product you buy. Beggars can't be choosers, and i'd rather get a product for free, with a couple o' (boogs) in it, than pay for a product that has a couple of (boogs) in it.

(I really shouldn't be speaking my mind in these things, as I am not a developer. But really, what is the difference between a free product in beta stage, and a free product past 1.0 - both are free, both will have bugs, and is it not but a change of status?)

Thank you to all developers of this fine *beta* product. And a note to Grunt, Firefox has no customers, it is a free product with developers and users who are only too thankful to get anything legal without paying one damn cent for the thing. Please do not scream at me, I am only criticizing as you have criticized. May the web be delivered...

While I am thrilled to see the upcoming Firfox 1.0RC release drawing quite near, I too, am rather disappointed at some of the (IMHO, more-serious) bugs apparently not being fixed before the grand 1.0 final release.

Specifically, the GDI leak bug on Win32, which can lead to OS resource exhastion, application/OS instability, and crashes. Is that something that should be considered acceptable for a 1.0 release, for a browser that is supposed to be "industrial strength"? I think not.

I also think that the installer issues really need to be resolved, and also "polished up" a bit, for the 1.0 release, especially for new users that may not be familiar with the apparent need to "edit scary config files" to customize FF to get it to work, as we all know. If it takes a "normal user" more than 5 minutes to configure FF enough in order to be able to use it easily and comfortably, they will simply jump back to use IE. I've seen it so many times, unfortunately.

I've been a long-term "believer" in this project, since the Netscape 6/Mozilla 0.9 days, and I'm glad to see some truely positive things happen with the codebase, but for a browser that is going to be advertised in the NYT, things really need to be ready for the end-user. "Smooth and slick" should be the release/install motto. The goal should be "no speed bumps" for the end-users, no matter how small - there simply shouldn't be any. Otherwise most will simply turn back to IE at any sign of resistance or difficulty.