It looks like we're going to be doing a Mozilla 1.7.11 pretty quickly in order to fix bugs 300749 and 301917. If you are a suite user and have any other concerns related to the 1.7.x releases, feel free to let me know here.
We have one fix in hand and are looking into the second issue today. I'll have updates, here or over at the Quality blog as soon as we get candidate builds.
Posted by asa at July 25, 2005 02:42 PMAh, the second bug is one of those hidden-from-the-public security bugs! ;-)
Posted by: David Naylor on July 25, 2005 04:17 PMHmm, there's a toolbar display issue on Mac OS X that I thought was caused by bug 239701, but I noticed a few days ago that it's still there. (I don't use the suite on OS X very often.) Some toolbar icons are chopped in half or have rows of horizontal lines in front of them, just like certain images on web pages did in that bug.
I can't find an existing bug, so I'll check it out tonight and see if I can collect enough info to submit a new one (which I realize has no chance of getting fixed in the next release). Or maybe that fix was never checked into the suite. I've never been able to tell from Bugzilla where a bug has been resolved.
Posted by: Kelson on July 25, 2005 04:18 PMWhat is wrong with your QA departement? Your release pattern starts to look more and more like nightlies.
You should review your last three releases and figure out whats went wrong with it. Theres a difference between offering a good and secure product vs. flooding the users with new releases, and mozilla products look more and more like the second option.
This bug 300749 seems to reveal how little time you must have spent testing the release. Switching folders in mail component broken? 1 hour playing with your 1.7.10 before releasing it would have shown the problem...
Posted by: Mathieu Pellerin on July 25, 2005 04:53 PMI wouldn't be surprized if Microsoft was covertly paying developers to go through the firefox sources and find vunerabilities to spread FUD in preparation for their IE7 release.
They've certainly been accustomed to anonymusly hiring 3rd party developers. Just listen to Martin Taylor's slashdot interview.
Maybe I need a tinfoil hat, but I wouldn't put it past them.
Posted by: Beer on July 25, 2005 05:21 PM"There's a difference between offering a good and secure product vs. flooding the users with new releases."
Asa,
It seems that with the new auto-update feature, not only can releases be more spaced out, but it seems that new features can be added and distributed on a rolling basis, without having to bunch them up into release cycles. With each feature being rolled out a few weeks after having proven its stability in QA, there would be less pressure on developers, testers, and translators, to finish before an arbitrary deadline (cf. 1.1 -> 1.5) and thus fewer rushed patches. Just a thought.
"Ah, the second bug is one of those hidden-from-the-public security bugs! ;-)"
No, it's just Bug 301917.
Posted by: mmj on July 25, 2005 06:20 PMAre the bugs just in the Mozilla Suite or also in Thunderbird 1.0.6?
Posted by: Daniel Schröter on July 25, 2005 11:51 PM@Brandon: I doubt each feature can be handled as as single piece. You have to test how it interacts with everything else - and so you would have to do the same tests for each little feature released. Perhaps, if the time between major versions seems to be too long, smaller milestones would be an option - but that has nothing to do with QA issues.
@Asa: those frequent minor releases aren't good for PR... no catastrophe, but they are a good point in discussions :(
Well, I hope with the new update mechanism, there won't be that much furore about a new minor release :)
obviously just mozilla suite...or they'd be releasing thunderbird 1.0.7......
Posted by: chris on July 26, 2005 12:12 AM@mmj: When I read Asa's post, it just said "bug 300749 and ."
Posted by: David Naylor on July 26, 2005 01:52 AMMaybe someone may do his work and don't write flame articles about Linux. Have MoFo something like QA? I don't know at this moment. Sorry I'm sad and our users too.
Posted by: Pavel Cvrcek on July 26, 2005 03:37 AMWhat Gecko version will be used? Suite version 1.7.11 using Gecko 1.7.10 seems a bit odd!
Posted by: Doug Wright on July 26, 2005 05:39 AMI don't feel surprised since the Suite is no longer the development focus…
Posted by: minghong on July 26, 2005 06:05 AMTo bad that things like this happen!
I hear people (I recommended to mozilla products) say: "See, I do not have time for this - I gonna use Internet Explorer and Outlook again."
And it is so much easier it comes with the OS loads a little faster (since it is largely build in the OS (and therfore loaded while booting)). People do not
realize that that is the reason why they are reading spam all the time and close
popups instead of surfing the web. And I do not think we can teach them (they do not want to know).
Our software has to be as easy to use and bug free.
At least with users as alpha-testers it seems to work and with 1.7.11 everything will be fine - I hope!
I still use Mozilla Suite since it is most memory efficient compared to firefox and thunderbird since I need them both all the time.
Posted by: Daniel Schmitt on July 26, 2005 07:27 AMUnrelated, but did you see this litte article on Netcraft?
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/07/25/performance_issues_for_mozilla_web_site.html
Posted by: Dennis Spaag on July 26, 2005 11:42 AM> "I don't feel surprised since the Suite is no longer the development focus…"
Well, I'd switch to FF/TB (despite the higher effort of having to maintain
two apps instead of one) if there weren't showstoppers like this 278231
Any chance to get bug 278812 fixed?
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=278812
Posted by: Gulliver on July 27, 2005 02:59 PM