Talk:Firefox:2.0 Product Planning:Draft Plan: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
Minh Nguyen (talk | contribs) (Déjà Vu) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* schrep: I like nice hard lines when doing release criteria. So I'd make the criteria as simple as possible - 100% of P1's complete. We'll also work on and accept P2/P3's, but if it is important enough to block the release it's a P1. I didn't edit because I thought there might be discussions. | * schrep: I like nice hard lines when doing release criteria. So I'd make the criteria as simple as possible - 100% of P1's complete. We'll also work on and accept P2/P3's, but if it is important enough to block the release it's a P1. I didn't edit because I thought there might be discussions. | ||
* [[User:Beltzner|Beltzner]]: Originally these criteria were my idea, but thinking back to my time with IBM, it was nitpicky stuff like calculating %ages of fixed bugs to meet Integrated Product Development (IPD) standards that ended up being used to ship crappy products. We'd bicker over whether or not to include invalid or retargeted bugs in those figures, etc. So maybe it would be easier to just say 100% of P1s. Is there a better way of reflecting the secondary goals of wanting to actually put effort into fixing a lot of the aviary2.0 blockers (which include a lot of UI polish bugs)? Maybe make that a P2 LI? | * [[User:Beltzner|Beltzner]]: Originally these criteria were my idea, but thinking back to my time with IBM, it was nitpicky stuff like calculating %ages of fixed bugs to meet Integrated Product Development (IPD) standards that ended up being used to ship crappy products. We'd bicker over whether or not to include invalid or retargeted bugs in those figures, etc. So maybe it would be easier to just say 100% of P1s. Is there a better way of reflecting the secondary goals of wanting to actually put effort into fixing a lot of the aviary2.0 blockers (which include a lot of UI polish bugs)? Maybe make that a P2 LI? | ||
== Déjà Vu == | |||
"Firefox 2 will aim to build on the success of Firefox by addressing issues related to the problem of managing the vast amounts of information available on the Internet. Our goal is to provide a browser that helps users manage and organize their online information channels." | |||
Wow, that sounds a whole lot like what Netscape Marketing once said about Netscape Communicator 5 and its planned SmartBrowsing functionality. But thankfully the notes you've put here is more than screenshots. – [[User:Minh Nguyen|Minh Nguyễn]] <small class="plainlinks">([[User talk:Minh Nguyen|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Minh Nguyen|contribs]], [http://mxn.f2o.org/index.html blog])</small> 14:04, 4 Dec 2005 (PST) | |||
Revision as of 22:04, 4 December 2005
Example Topic
- yourname: yourpoint
- anothername: another point on topic
Release Criteria
- schrep: I like nice hard lines when doing release criteria. So I'd make the criteria as simple as possible - 100% of P1's complete. We'll also work on and accept P2/P3's, but if it is important enough to block the release it's a P1. I didn't edit because I thought there might be discussions.
- Beltzner: Originally these criteria were my idea, but thinking back to my time with IBM, it was nitpicky stuff like calculating %ages of fixed bugs to meet Integrated Product Development (IPD) standards that ended up being used to ship crappy products. We'd bicker over whether or not to include invalid or retargeted bugs in those figures, etc. So maybe it would be easier to just say 100% of P1s. Is there a better way of reflecting the secondary goals of wanting to actually put effort into fixing a lot of the aviary2.0 blockers (which include a lot of UI polish bugs)? Maybe make that a P2 LI?
Déjà Vu
"Firefox 2 will aim to build on the success of Firefox by addressing issues related to the problem of managing the vast amounts of information available on the Internet. Our goal is to provide a browser that helps users manage and organize their online information channels."
Wow, that sounds a whole lot like what Netscape Marketing once said about Netscape Communicator 5 and its planned SmartBrowsing functionality. But thankfully the notes you've put here is more than screenshots. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs, blog) 14:04, 4 Dec 2005 (PST)