What's the likelihood of Thunderbird 1.1 including any Help documentation? Even a nominal, incomplete effort would be better than nothing.

Greg, I'm sure that good patches are welcome :-)

--Asa

When will Mozilla 1.8 be released? Sometime after the toolkit 1.1 releases? (Obviously it's going to be off the Gecko 1.8 branch).

I suppose I shouldn't complain, given all the work that's been done getting Firefox and Thunderbird 1.0 out the door, but all that release work has left Mozilla without a release for more than year (well, by the time June rolls around and you've released the 1.1s).

I guess gnome spends almost half the time in some sort of freeze so it's fairly common for the actual release process to be the blocker/critical path.

Anyway, 1.8a6 seems more unstable than a4 or a5, hopefully Talkback is providing useful data.

Greg, I'd put it at slightly above nil (particularly that the docs would be a nominal, incomplete effort -- when Help goes in release builds, it'll be about 90%-95% complete). I'm working on getting the Help Viewer working in Thunderbird (which is the first and most necessary big step) in bug 253334, but I need a few other things to be fixed first. That means I need reviews, those oh-so-elusive creatures that require forever and a day to get. First, the lack of Find Toolbar and Find as You Type code in Thunderbird means that bug 279227 needs to be fixed. Bug 267227 also has some relevance to getting the viewer working in Thunderbird, so that probably needs to get into code too. (This bug's probably the biggest blocker bug because it's a rather lengthy and moderately complicated patch.) Finally, because Thunderbird's not Firefox, I need to get bug 260058 and bug 268776 fixed as well.

The worst part is that that's all just to get to the point where we could view help documentation. The documentation itself still needs to be written, mostly, which just might be the biggest stumbling block. This, however, is the easiest problem to solve -- I just need enough helpers over at the Thunderbird Help Documentation effort on wiki.m.o, where we're collaboratively writing the docs until they reach a state of decent completeness (at which point I'll start transferring them over into source code). However, until I think what we have is of good enough quality and quantity, I don't intend to have Help in a release build. Instead, I want to get it in nightlies first (probably in partial form) so that it can be hammered for functionality and completeness of documentation whatever documentation gets checked into source as time goes. Also, as a college student I have limited time, and without sufficient help from others there's very, very little chance it'll get done in time for the localization freeze.

By the way: I feel somewhat compelled to respond to Asa's comment that "I'm sure that good patches are welcome". Say that if you want, but if in reality someone writes a patch but then has to wait forever and a day to get said patch reviewed (particularly if it's a patch for Firefox -- backend fixes seem to go a bit faster), I think saying that good patches are welcome is almost in a way stretching the truth.

James, we don't yet have plans for a Seamonkey 1.8 release. Our focus is on delivering our premier applications, Firefox and Thunderbird, while providing security and stability upgrades for Seamonkey 1.7.x.

--Asa

Asa, there was already a number of opinions against the use of the term "Preview Release" for the Beta release (see the comments in http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/007436.html), and I really think this is *not* a good idea.

Find another word if 'Preview Release' is too tainted, *don't* use it for releases that which not match what people expect from Preview Releases.

The whole program looks like a good thing.

Asa, due to the high profile nature of the IDN vulnerability, don't you think the 1.0.1 and 1.7.6 releases should get higher priority? Perhaps if the nightlies are stable enough, make beta releases of those immediately to get feedback sooner?

No plans for a Mozilla 1.8 release? Then why even make betas, if there are no plans for a release of what the beta is for?

Why do I get the impression that the Mozilla Application Suite is being used as nothing more than a camouflaged test subject for FF and TB?

We Mozilla users don't want our suite neglected in favor of other projects! It's not fair!

Benoit, your impression is mostly correct. We are using Seamonkey as a testing vehicle for Gecko. Gecko is important to all of our product releases. I can see how you would think that is unfair, but it shouldn't come as any big surprise. We've been making this transition for over a year now. Firefox and Thunderbird are the Mozilla premier applicationa Seamonkey is not.

--Asa

Indeed, it doesn't come as a surprise at all.
But this attitude is pissing off both Seamonkey users and developers, and ultimately to be neglected. This is not open-source anymore, this is more and more looking like a company that wants to kill its child, in favor of two babies.

First you focus heavily on your prime product, only to then let it die?
What about the Seamonkey developers? Its users? The websites that put effort into Seamonkey documentation?

So it was all for nothing? We were fooled into the Firefox trap, because several developers felt that Firefox is superior, and wanted to take everyone on it?

You do realize that this is an insult to all who have believed in Mozilla, do you? This is pure treachery and abuse.

Open-source is a big lie, it seems.

Benoit, I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of open source. One of it's key points is that as long as there are people who wish to develope the code, it can live on. If there are seamonkey developers and users who want to keep it going, then, with their efforts, it will probably keep going. Open source makes it explicitely difficult to kill a project. On the other hand, if there are no developers interested in keeping it going, then open source projects will die.

The point I was making is that the Mozilla Foundation has limited resources and those resources will be focused on our premier applications, Firefox and Thunderbird, and the shared core code, Gecko.

This was not the decision of "several developers that felt Firefox was superior." It has been the plan for some time. You can go read the Mozilla roadmap, which described the plan to shift focus from Seamonkey to the standalone apps almost two years ago.

--Asa

The roadmap and "the plan" did not mention that shifting focus to the other application would also mean neglecting Seamonkey.

Firefox developers and the Mozilla Foundation are well on their way to kill the project, by (among others) pissing off Seamonkey developers by placing Mozilla in the obscure "Other Products" category on the main site.

I seriously doubt that "the plan" was approved by everyone. It seems that the Mozilla Foundation has all the tricks for making the decisions that only the entity approves, and not the developers themselves.

Wasn't the Mozilla Foundation's mission "choice"? They failed to give the choice of Mozilla and Firefox.

Benoit, what does "shifting focus" mean to you? To me it means that you're going to put more focus on one thing and less on the other. That's what's happening.

--Asa

Yes, that's what "shifting focus" is, but as it is now, the Mozilla Foundation is close to neglecting the Suite.

If this was really open-source, the Mozilla Foundation wouldn't make such decisions to neglect the Suite and just put it in "Other Products" and discouraging work on the Suite, effectively killing it.

Benoit, I'm pretty sure that you misunderstand the meaning of "open source".

--Asa

You may be right.

But I'm sure that open-source doesn't consist of one entity (Mozilla Foundation) bossing around what the developers do.

Benoit, we're not bossing anybody. If you want to continue to work on Seamonkey, that's fine. We'll even provide some infrastructure, like CVS, Bugzilla, download bandwidth, etc. (which is far from free) so that you can continue to work on Seamonkey.

--Asa

The reason this change of focus irks Seamonkey users, is because Firefox has become a WONTFIX-bonanza for many thing that are simply more usable in the Suite:

Firefox' URL autocomplete is buggy (Bug 246237). Its tabs need a visual redesign (Bug 206175, INVALID). It has no site navigation bar (Bug 187488, WONTFIX). Bookmark notifications were actively removed with Bug 253478. Filing groups of bookmarks is unpolished (Bug 257311). You can't place the New Tab button in the correct place (on the tab-bar) without extensions. Its Ctrl+Enter functionality is inconsistent between links and the URL bar (Bug 177498, WONTFIX). No support for changing file associations (Bug 216501, WONTFIX). Handling of the Find bar is inconsistent with other toolbars (Bug 250587, WONTFIX). The installer makes things needlessly difficult compared to Seamonkey's excellent installer, especially for those who are used to specifying a new installation folder by merely changing the path (Bugs 280195, 254961, 251735, 229343, 241282). Opening a folder in a group of tabs is slow compared to Seamonkey groupmarks (Bug 172675). The Find toolbar makes Find-As-You-Type annoying (Bug 250309). Links-only-FAYT is buried as a hidden pref and is no longer available for user of the Find toolbar (Bug 250924, WONTFIX with nary a comment to explain why).

You see, it's not just that Seamonkey is quicker, it's also more usable for many of us. You can read many similar comments by other disappointed Seamonkey users in mozillazine forums.

Prog.

I have to agree that the Suite is being pushed into the back of the closet when it still does many things better than FF. Not only that, but some of the things that are a part of the suite's browser are (for all intents and purposes) intentionally abandoned for not apparent reason. E.g. Grippies, download caching (when you start clicking through the menus to direct the download to a particular folder the download is taking place in the Suite, but not in FF. Some things simply appear as though no one benefited from the experience of the suite. Whereas the suite is pretty much useable the way it is downloaded it is necessary to make multiple searches to see if there are any extensions (much less functioning ones) which restore at least some of what was left out of FF.

The avowed purpose of the foundation was to provide a browser that is readily useable by end users, not something for corporate IT types to try to configure. By that standard FF has achieved very limited results in my view.

Two links that may be interesting in this regard:

• Bug 282239 - Bugs that annoy Suite users switching to Firefox (Seamonkey parity)

• Firefox for Mozilla 1.x and Netscape 7.x Users

Prog.

I am fascinated by the decision to abandon a product that has so many people still wanting to use it...namely Mozilla Suite. I realize this 'transition' has been doing on for months now, but it seems to go on without any regard to the damage it's causing, the people who state over and over how they prefer the Suite, don't like Firefox, etc. It seems as though the developers just don't care...sort of like another software developer we all know.....

Ann

Win98 vs. Win XP anyone? ;)

Seriously that's what this Mozilla vs Firefox thing reminds me of. There are many good and valid reasons to use one over the other.

And yes. I just compared Firefox to XP, because IMO, it IS the XP of the Mozilla family: cute, annoying, lacking in areas I find important, excelling in some areas I find trivial.

Unlike 98 however, I don't find Mozilla lacking in any area that I consider important.

I hope there are enough developers who feel the same way that Seamonkey can continue and co-exist with Firefox. Otherwise, I might just have to go back to those programming books I abandoned...

I just want to say that I'm a Mozilla user and that I won't switch to Firefox. I tried it, I liked it but I rather like Mozilla mainly (but not only) because of the "suite" concept. I promote both apps, Firefox and Mozilla. I know at least 10 people who switched from IE to Firefox, then from Firefox to Mozilla because of the mail integration (so they could dump Outlook). I think that many Firefox users will switch to the Suite. I work for a security company, all our computers have Mozilla installed as primary browser and we even use the Mozilla calendar to organize our agents' schedule (which are automatically updated on agents' home computers). It works perfectly! I think they are other companies who switched from Netscape Communicator to Mozilla. Mozilla has a bright future! To me, Firefox was designed to attack Microsoft on their field, the stand-alone browser but many people just want something else. We have the CHOICE, I chose Mozilla but we should have the RIGHT to be up-to-date and benefit from new features. Don't drop it!

The first browser I downloaded back in 1998 was the Netscape Suite, version 4.??. I liked the fact that everything was "integrated", ex. browser, mail, address book, etc. I didn't move to a newer browser until Netscape 7.0. Tried to move to Netscape 6, man it sucked. Went all the way up to 7.2, the current latest version. I finally decided to move to the Mozilla Suite and get rid of Netscape's extra baggage that I really didn't need.

I've downloaded Firefox and have recommended it to fellow computer users, and even used it for a part time job I had until Christmas last year. I've contemplated moving to Firefox/Thunderbird and ditching the Suite. So far I can't do it. One reason, extensions. There are some useful(and nice) extensions that work/still work in the Suite that don't work or aren't available in Firefox 1.0. And, yeah, I realize that there are extensions for Firefox that don't work in the Suite. Plus, having to install some of the same extensions twice, one copy for FF and one copy for TB, doesn't make a lot of sense. Sorry Asa, and the rest of the Mozilla devs, but this idea should have been worked on from the start, especially considering that both FF & TB have extension managers, something the Suite pre-dates.

Frankly, the Mozilla team should be working on standardizing internals between the Suite and FF and the Suite and TB. That way, some improvements made to FF/TB will also move into the Suite easily. The 3 already share more than just the Gecko engine.

Want a way to please the Suite users? Go beyond the Lightning project and create a NEW Suite integrating Firefox, Thunderbird, Sunbird & Nvu. You guys are already heading down the path to replace every component of the Suite with individual programs, why not work on combining all of them together. That way all of them can share the same extensions, only need one copy of each extension installed, like the current Suite, and any bugs/patches/improvements could be made to both the New Suite and the individual program at the same time. Users would then have the option of either individual programs or the whole suite that would both work exactly the same way. I hope I'm not the only person to come up with this idea.

Let's be clear about this, shall we. Firefox will ultimately fail. It is a kiddie
browser, attracting only those who favor "flavor of the week" type crap. As it
will not keep that status forever, it's use will taper off and die. I for one
will never use it, regardless of whatever. The self important arrogance that swirls
around those calling the shots vis-a-vis letting Mozilla Suite die off in favor of
fireturd will end up being the death of both. Very few enterprise users will trust
the organization that destroyed their faithful browser in favor of their own pet
project.(yes, that is exactly what you are guilty of)

Asa, what you fail to grasp is the importance many people attach to Mozilla Suite.
For many, it signafies continued allegience to our beloved Netscape, which many of
us first experienced the internet with, and continued to use despite the massive
and mostly successful drive by microsatan to supplant Netscape with IE. Your actions,
and that of your group, represent nothing short of complete betrayal of the people
whose continued support of Mozilla allowed you all the time to develop firefox.
This issue will not go away either. Rather, it will likely grow as more and
more become aware of your treachery. This is not rocket science either. The fix
is there in front of your nose. You need not abbandon your ugly stepchild(firefox).
Rather, a slight change in tactics, ie: keeping Mozilla alive and growing, will
surely keep everybody happy. Logically, there is no reason to abandon one for the
other.

And yes, if I had the skills, I would do it myself. But that is not where my skills lie.

That last post makes me laugh. Treachery implies that this was some sort of secret, which it wasn't, or that there's maliciousness involved, which there isn't. Its simply a matter of "where is the demand?" and that lies with Firefox and the other standalone apps right now, from corporates, from small companies, and from individuals.

The microsatan references gave me a flashback to 1999, too. That was cool.

People are pathetic.
Before you post, you should actually think and investigate before pushing the "Post" button.

If you read Asa's comments well, you will see he never said the suite is being 'abandoned'. He states that the current and future "focus" is on Firefox, TB and the stand-alone apps.

The suite is key for testing gecko, and keeping those who deploy it happy.

What you (*cough* winers) are complaining about is that the MoFo resources are not going directly to the Suite. While I understand your complaints as Asa mentions, anyone is free to stand up and rise as a Suite Maintainer, many people have been thinking about this (i.e. http://www.steelgryphon.com/blog).

Whining will not help, if you really want to see the Suite Survive and progress like you want it, help out, form several groups, even if you are not Fit for programming you can head up QA groups. Lots can be done. Complaining and moaning that some organization's focus is somewhere else does nothing good in the long run.

I for one wouldn't think it was fair if part of the donation money that MoFo gets for firefox is put into the Suite, and visa-versa.

People and companies put money where there mouth is and contribute to what they want and need (i.e. Google -> Firefox, etc.).

Again, lots can be done. But whining and trying to get others to do for you want you want is lame and selfish.

Get your act together and help out.
Just my two cents

-Jed

Asa, I'm sorry about the way this thread has gone. I know you don't like negative bickering around here, and I can only assume this is going to close for comments shortly because of the nasty idiots posting in it.

It's pretty lame that the peanut gallery has to resort to insulting Firefox, as if this is somehow going to affect the suite's future.

- Chris

More productive response from MConnor: http://www.steelgryphon.com/blog/index.php?p=32

I'm a user, not a developer. Firefox is a vast improvement over IE -- something we all have to keep in mind -- and I'll be glad to use it, as it itself improves, rather than IE or its variants.

However, even I, a novice, can see that Mozilla is where the action is, in terms of innovation and staying ahead of the curve. Firefox is nice, but I doubt that it will maintain leadership once Microsoft starts to apply resources to IE that mimic Firefox's features and functions.

Without Mozilla and similar efforts to drive invention within the spectrum of applications developed by the Greater Mozilla community, it could very well be that all of this work will have been for naught, and that IE will triumph in the end. What a disappointment that would be.

So, yes, this isn't an evil decision by MoFo, just an incorrect one that could discount to zero the value of its work to date. Please consider that Mozilla and its derivatives are a process, not a product.

I should add, I'm a "novice" only in terms of browser development. I've been online since the early ARPANET days and have consulted on corporate and product development in the software industry, from an historical and marketing perspective, for almost as long. So my observations have a little history behind them.

I don't think it's unreasonable to have some sort of rough estimates for Mozilla 1.8, at this point, say a month after the 1.1s? That'd give time for Suite-only related blockers to be fixed. Obviously the more clear plans would be for Firefox/Thunderbird 1.1, as they're coming together as time moves forward clearly. Not having planned it out at all is a little odd to me when coming up on 1.8b2. Particularly when a stable Gecko 1.8 is just as vital to Firefox/Thunderbird.

If this is a situation where volunteers are needed to assist with coordinating Mozilla 1.8 to make it happen because current staff are simply already busy enough for Firefox/Tbird 1.1, then simply say that. (though I doubt its the case) I have no problem with the change in focus, its not unexpected or even bad, Firefox vs. Mozilla is annoyingly stupid and childish. They're not the same target audience, and there's nothing wrong with that. The core issue of not having a schedule, at all, for a stable product's release, is the problem here, it need not get clouded with Moz vs. Fox bickering. That won't get the issue solved at all, and just makes it much more likely to be ignored.

What a buch of whiners in this thread. People: if you don't like the way the Foundation is handling your favorite app, then why the hell don't you do something about it yourselves? It _IS_ open source software, so if the demand for this product is still as strong as you think it is, then why don't you make this project work? Why invest so much time in whining instead of helping to improve the situation, if you are so convinced that what the Mozilla Foundation is doing now is wrong?

Open source is not about being able to tell others what they should do, it is about having the freedom and opportunities to help shape things in a community effort. Not by whining about the (in)actions of others, but by getting involved yourself! If the Mozilla Foundation doesn't want to pursue active development of the Suite anymore, other than for testing purposes (I personally don't see why they should; my memories of "our beloved Netscape" are rather nightmarish), and you can't convince the MoFo people to decide otherwise, then it is up to _YOU_ to prove them wrong and do something about it. Not by whining, but by developing, by showing leadership, by pulling the project back on track, or by side-tracking the project if that isn't feasible. Why don't you FORK the damned code if you are so sure of your arguments!

-SFO

I know the commentary on this entry is getting a little long and wound up, so I apologize for adding to it. I don't know how many of the prior posters will re-visit, so I might be wasting my time in regards to them. Hopefully, my PoV will be of some slight use to Asa.

First of all, for Phil: According to your remedy, I think you misunderstand just a bit. Many of us don't just use the suite because it's a suite. We actually like the browser component of the suite better than Firefox. Bundling the FF browser together into a "new suite" doesn't make it function any better as a browser for us. Nice (and polite) try though.

Jed: If I am reading correctly, you need to follow a bit of your own advice. You indicate that Asa never implied that the suite was being abandoned. However, in one of his earlier posts, he said "we don't yet have plans for a Seamonkey 1.8 release. Our focus is on delivering our premier applications, Firefox and Thunderbird, while providing security and stability upgrades for Seamonkey 1.7.x." I'm not sure how else to interpret that. Saying that there are no plans for a non-beta release of the suite certainly seems so close to abandonment to me as to be indistinguishable. If I and all the other Seamonkey users are mis-interpreting Asa's comments, then maybe he can clarify a bit. Maybe they intend to have a 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, etc. release and simply haven't scheduled it yet -- but that's not the impression I'm getting.

SFO: Sounds great in theory, but when most of "us" are users and not programmers, that particular benefit of OSS is not very applicable in practice. Advocacy is another way we can "contribute" to any software project (OSS or the other kind :). While some of us might choose words that irritate each other, we are all contributing in some fashion. If no one told the MoFo devs that we don't like some of their choices, we would be doing them a disservice.

Oh well - that's all for now. There are plenty of other discussions on this topic. I do want to say thanks to Asa and the other devs for the work that they have done -- some of us just wish there was more support forthcoming for what we believe is a superior product.

-txGreg

Asa, Benoit, distinguished guests, ...,

If events have overtaken Moz 1.8 development such that a rewrite of Gecko is planned for 1.9, then I propose:

1. Skip the Moz 1.8 release, this time. Reason: so that resources (including 1-2 months of time) can be devoted to #2.

2. Proceed with Moz 1.9 development and release, including the new/newest Gecko rewrite.

3. Base F/T 1.1 on Moz 1.9, not 1.8 as currently planned. Reason: so they'll have that Moz 1.9 Gecko, too.

Note: I am not a developer so I have no idea if this proposal makes any sense or not. But, I would be happy using Moz 1.7.x &/or F/T 1.0.x until the above can happen, if it is adopted.

Thank you,
Eddie Maddox