home.KaiRo.at
Bio
weBlog
[arts corner]
[science corner]
Slides
Fotogalerien
Kontakt
Suche
>> www.KaiRo.at
New comment
Name:
Email:
Homepage:
Location:
JavaScript support is required for this form to work.
Calculate:
72 plus 8 equals
Subject:
Entry text:
[quote="Justin Wood (Callek)"]To me, the affect of stability was helped by both us always making sure we were dogfoodable and mozilla with its new testing infra and us even taking advantage of it, and making sure things did not break THEM based on OUR settings, or fixing THEM when our settings exposed a bug. We even had/have our own testing infra (and TB devs even instituted a stricter testing infra for their own patches now). This should ensure that the stability doesn't waver below what the "post suiterunner" stability was. That said, my personal opinion is to keep 2.1 working for 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 until we know the timeline of 1.9.3's next release. Once we know that we can make a final decision. and if we don't know the timeline when we get closer to our planned release date we can release off 1.9.2 and be happy that we still met our goals. The pain point[s] would be to keep 1.9.3 working through all that, and whenever TB decides we need to cut to c-c branch... But we can work around that. My personal desires for SM2.next is to define the "key features we want to take" ++ "extra features would be nice" independent of what 1.9.2/1.9.3 brings. This way we can be sure to have an iterative experience for our users, beyond just a Gecko update. The exact branch is a seperate issue that is relatively easy to tackle.[/quote]
I accept and follow
the policy of Home of KaiRo
.
This entry supports
emoji
,
bbCode
, and
some HTML codes
.