W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > October 2004

Re: Mozilla Intranet focus and quality Assurance.

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 17:47:18 +0100
Message-ID: <039601c4a89f$7aa1b160$418f9bd9@Snufkin>
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: <www-archive@w3.org>

"Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
> On Sat, 2 Oct 2004, Jim Ley wrote:
> See, e.g.:
>   http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4096B118.3050903%40meer.net
>
> Brendan's points in that e-mail apply equally well to your patch as they
> did to XForms and MNG when he wrote it.

Interesting,  I'm slightly confused though about what::

"if someone wants
to step up, implement XForms well, and own the code, Mozilla will take
it as an extension"

means in relation to patches?  Where does this ownership come from, and 
exactly what is required?

>> How is Quality Assurance conducted within in Mozilla?
>
> By anyone who files a bug.

No, could you describe the process by which reported bugs are marked as 
INVALID/WONTFIX etc. by the QA contact on the bugs, or where I could find 
the description?

I understood that the group described by the web documents available after 
making an HTTP GET on http://www.mozilla.org/quality/ to be Mozilla QA.

>> As I understood http://www.mozilla.org/quality/ to be Mozilla QA.
>
> That is a Web page. Web pages do not have opinions on whether things are
> acceptable or not.

I rewrote the sentance, as that's obviously a point of contention.

Jim. 
Received on Saturday, 2 October 2004 16:47:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:46 GMT