Comments on: Mozilla “Prototypes” http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2006/07/10/mozilla-prototypes/ Tue, 06 Jan 2009 11:59:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Francis http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2006/07/10/mozilla-prototypes/comment-page-1/#comment-56 Francis Thu, 13 Jul 2006 09:27:54 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=87#comment-56 Personally, I like the name "Mozilla Soup" :) Personally, I like the name “Mozilla Soup” :)

]]> By: Basil Hashem http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2006/07/10/mozilla-prototypes/comment-page-1/#comment-55 Basil Hashem Wed, 12 Jul 2006 16:55:13 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=87#comment-55 I think depending upon the prototype, it may be more suited to be an extension, but it may also be a special build of firefox (if required) or even a Flash demo/mockup. At the prototype phase, I think the goal should be to validate the design approach and get some feedback for further refinement. I think we should differentiate that from how and when a validated concept makes it into Firefox core. That is the decision of the module owners/product team/etc... I've written up some thoughts on Mozilla Prototypes at http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_Prototypes. I think depending upon the prototype, it may be more suited to be an extension, but it may also be a special build of firefox (if required) or even a Flash demo/mockup. At the prototype phase, I think the goal should be to validate the design approach and get some feedback for further refinement.

I think we should differentiate that from how and when a validated concept makes it into Firefox core. That is the decision of the module owners/product team/etc…

I’ve written up some thoughts on Mozilla Prototypes at http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_Prototypes.

]]> By: Robert Walsh http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2006/07/10/mozilla-prototypes/comment-page-1/#comment-54 Robert Walsh Wed, 12 Jul 2006 04:05:14 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=87#comment-54 I realise that, but some extensions could be made part of the core firefox if deemed important enough. Which is why i think it would be better to put your efforts into a process that would move an extension into the firefox core. I realise that, but some extensions could be made part of the core firefox if deemed important enough.

Which is why i think it would be better to put your efforts into a process that would move an extension into the firefox core.

]]> By: Deacon Nikolai http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2006/07/10/mozilla-prototypes/comment-page-1/#comment-53 Deacon Nikolai Wed, 12 Jul 2006 01:09:38 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=87#comment-53 Glad to hear! Glad to hear!

]]> By: Mitchell Baker http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2006/07/10/mozilla-prototypes/comment-page-1/#comment-52 Mitchell Baker Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:05:54 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=87#comment-52 Robert: Our hope is actually to try out things that may well be better in the core of Firefox than as an extension. I see this as being complementary to mozdev. Some mozdev projects have migrated to the core of Firefox and I expect that to continue. I expect mozdev will be the home of things that none of us would have thought up, could have predicted, but someone just does. That's a great part of our strength. Robert:

Our hope is actually to try out things that may well be better in the core of Firefox than as an extension.

I see this as being complementary to mozdev. Some mozdev projects have migrated to the core of Firefox and I expect that to continue. I expect mozdev will be the home of things that none of us would have thought up, could have predicted, but someone just does. That’s a great part of our strength.

]]> By: Mozdev http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2006/07/10/mozilla-prototypes/comment-page-1/#comment-51 Mozdev Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:36:24 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=87#comment-51 So how does this differ from what Mozdev should be? It seems like this is just Mozdev 2.0 (or whatever). Work should be done with them. Or do you see prototypes as pre- Mozdev / HEAD. Many extensions from Mozdev have made it into HEAD after their usefulness was seen. There are some that haven't made it, however, but are stable releases hosted by Mozdev. Such products would be "graduates" of Mozilla Prototypes in the new world... Just some random thoughts. I think it'd important to see how this fits along side Mozdev and all the resources it already offers as well as how to keep from alienating them. So how does this differ from what Mozdev should be? It seems like this is just Mozdev 2.0 (or whatever). Work should be done with them. Or do you see prototypes as pre- Mozdev / HEAD. Many extensions from Mozdev have made it into HEAD after their usefulness was seen. There are some that haven’t made it, however, but are stable releases hosted by Mozdev. Such products would be “graduates” of Mozilla Prototypes in the new world…

Just some random thoughts. I think it’d important to see how this fits along side Mozdev and all the resources it already offers as well as how to keep from alienating them.

]]>