[Project_owners] Clarification for a SeaMonkey User

Pete Collins pete at mozdev.org
Sat Sep 13 22:21:44 EDT 2003


> The aim is to make these smaller.

One way to make them smaller is to release them as XPI packages on top 
of a *working* GRE/MRE/INSERT_SDK_ACRONYM_HERE


> Maybe not you, but many many people didn't want the bloat. They didn't 
> want Composer, Chatzilla ... and all the other extras.

Brian, I did the math. 18.7 M (Firebird/Thunderbird) to 15M Mozilla 
App/Bloat Suite.  These are compressed not extracted footprint numbers :-)

Now we have everything as a "stand alone" distro which is *increasing" 
the bloat not reducing it.

> Signs are that it is being phased out. See (though out of date):
> 
> http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/branding.html

Yes, I read this branding document. Let me sum it up. It is Chris 
Blizzards attempt at "semantic nomenclature soup du jour". It doesn't 
provide any real useful information.


> "After the release of 1.4 we will be doing our primary development on 
> the Firebird and Thunderbird projects.  When we do releases of that 
> codebase we should be using self-descriptive brand identities for the 
> public and the press."

What does that mean though? Continuation of the redundant distribution 
of core Mozilla base libraries which is exactly what we have now.


> Again in the branding document, Phoenix/Firebird is supposed to evolve 
> into Mozilla Browser, and Thunderbird into Mozilla Mail. This naming 
> policy has not happened, and there are no signs that it will.

It seems to me that Mozilla needs to be a MRE. A base set of core 
libraries that can run xpinstall. This is something I remember pleading 
for at the first developer meeting we held out at Mountain View. A set 
of core general purpose xpcom libraries. The architecture is already 
modular, Mozilla.org is just distributing their base apps in a 
Monolithic fasion.

> No, branches are still maintained (1.4, 1.5 ...). For whom I am not 
> sure. Legacy reasons perhaps (netscape) ... third party developers?

Well that sucks for the user base out here.

> And Calendar, and Chatzilla, and <insert your favourite extension here>.

I don't look at Chatzilla or Calendar as extensions. They are 
applications written on top of the "Mozilla Platform".

Unless I misunderstood you and you mean:

<app> <app> <insert your favourite extension here>.

> Agreed. A clearly defined plan, well publicised and executed .... is 
> badly needed.


I think what we have is a very distinct developer base for Mozilla.

Browser/MailNews

and

MAD Platformers.

--pete

-- 
Pete Collins
www.mozdev.org
www.mozdevgroup.com




More information about the Project_owners mailing list