Talk:Firefox/Archive 2

message: 'Raptor' was an earlier name for the Gecko rendering engine, not an embedding sample. See for example http://news.com.com/New+engine+for+Mozilla+code/2100-1001_3-210279.html. If I recall correctly, the name was changed due to trademark problems. I don't think it had anything to do with xulrunner, which might be what the current reference to Raptor is about.
Ah no, actually 'Gecko' is NGLayout + XPFE, while 'Raptor' was just NGLayout. See http://www.mozilla.org/newlayout/gecko.html. The reference to Raptor is still incorrect, though.
:Fixed. --minghong 18:41, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raptor 

message: I'm notice a distinct lack of the sentence "it remains to be seen how robust ...blank... is in the security field".  At the moment we only have it twice, once in the Security section and again in the Market adoption section.  I'm not certain how many times we actually need it to appear, so I propose we add it to the end of every paragraph.  Just to be certain that we are covering our bases.  AlistairMcMillan 19:46, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: robust

message: Shall we create a new page named "Portable Mozilla Application"? Because it is quite important to have Firefox/Thunderbird/Sunbird/Nvu in an portable drive, especially that we are going to embrace the U3 standard . See more details on what these portable applications are different from the original ones . - minghong 10:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portable Firefox? (or Portable Mozilla Application?) 

message: Since all the layout/security issues are in fact related to the Gecko core, I think it would be better move them to Mozilla/Gecko or create a new page like Mozilla security model (just a suggestion). This article should focus on the usability issues, marketing, usage share, etc. --Minghong 21:29, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shall we move some content away from Firefox? 

message: This article is not the place to hash out disputes about whether asking people to ( review a piece of software / flood a review site ) is OK. "Original research" and pushing opinions on that matter is just as unacceptable as pushing opinions about the software itself. --FOo 04:04, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Try not to edit war here, guys 

message: This may seem like a totally unrelated (and irrelevant) comment, but how does Firefox development acutally work? Do developers at Mozilla bang away at the code and release the nightlies each night, leaving only the users to simply report bugs? Or do users actually contribute to the code? And if so how is this coordinated? Sorry for this irrelvant comment, but I'm really confused as to how Firefox is made.--64.231.222.180 04:48, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I found out after digging in the Mozilla website (post patches in Bugzilla, eventually if you're doing a good job you can post via CVS). Funny how you can never find the answer until you put it on paper and ask again...--64.231.227.86 05:17, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion 

message: It's worth mentioning the BeOS version as well. Andre (talk) 03:02, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
:I don't see a current Firefox release there, only 0.8. Sorry dude, I have a BeBox in my basement and I don't think it's too widely supported. *sigh* As with Internet Explorer on Mac and Unix, i think we'd have to consider that a discontinued port. --FOo 04:06, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you are interested in running Firefox on BeOS you may want to look here  and/or here . AlistairMcMillan 06:09, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  BeOS 

message: Just poking my head in here real quick. I noticed that someone else's edits had knocked out the large image displayed of the ad placed in the New York Times. I was about to fix the error when I realized how much shorter the article was. Do we really the full image displayed or can we use a smaller version to save space and lay-out? Coolgamer 23:16, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
Another problem, by the way,is that you're still using the old logo... View Spot the Difference
:Just replaced the logos. --minghong 13:48, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: With the new 1.0.1 release, the caret issue has been addressed; I am now removing that section.
:It was a concern in older releases, and should be preserved (although I envision eventually getting around to spinning various sections of this article off to other pages). Johnleemk | Talk 10:14, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  caret position 

message: Johnleemk is trimming content like there is no tomorrow. Is he authorized to do so (based on discussion here)? --Minghong 16:07, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Summary style is definitely a requirement for an article originally more than double the recommended the size of 32kb. No content is lost; it's merely summarised and pushed off to subarticles. Johnleemk | Talk 16:14, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely this help to reduce the file size per page. But I see one big problem is that there are too much overlapping between this original article and the spinoffs, e.g. Firefox features. Any updates and corrections need to be done twice (or more) as the same information is scattered over several articles, which is bad IMO. Perhep you should reduce the overlapping. --Minghong 17:50, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See article size - the idea is to spread detail across several articles. I avoided removing too much overlapping content because it seemed to me a lot of the detail was needed for the main article. I'll cut a bit more here and there. Johnleemk | Talk 05:51, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content trimming? 

message: Has anyone ever tried using a Firefox profile from another OS, like Windows, with the Mac OSX version of Firefox? What about other platforms? All I've tried is x86 Linux and Windows. Reub2000 06:50, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Profile on Mac OSX 

message: I commented the part about PNG problem because there is no prove. Can someone provides the bug report of this "problem" or discussion thread of this "problem"? --minghong 12:33, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I found the bugs myself  . One of the bugs is UNCONFIRMED. And the confirmed bug affect Mac OS X only. This is probably GFX bug. However I don't think it is notable. --minghong 12:38, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: PNG bug?

message: Firefox needs a "search inside textbox" feature, or (on this page) someone should provide a link to a plugin that will enable this.
:Agreed, but I don't see how that's relevant to this article. -Grick(talk to me) 01:35, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
::Agree. P.S. It's bug 252371. --minghong 08:55, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing Wikipedia Entries 

message: I'm not wild about the Release History section of this article, but I wanted to disucuss it before I made any major changes.
The first sentence editorializes without providing any information, and then the paragraph proceeds to give very little useful information about previous Firefox versions: Pre-1.0 versions had problems with backwards compatability and extensions, and after 1.0, they released a few security updates, each about a month apart.  Then the section discusses Firefox's internal code names for two paragraphs.  Who cares?
What does everyone else think?  Can we do something about that section?
Starwiz 18:30, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
:Maybe, but these are extracted from the main article "History of Mozilla Firefox". --minghong 18:12, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release History 

message: I'd like to think I'm a moderately savvy computer user.  But this section is so gunked up with what I assume to be CVS jargon that I'm having a great deal of difficulty understanding it, much less cleaning it up.  For example:
: Targeted for June 2005, Firefox 1.1 will resync the code-base of the release builds (as opposed to nightly builds) with the core "trunk" which contains additional features not available in 1.0, as it branched from the trunk around the 0.9 release. As such, there has been a backlog of bug fixes between 0.9 and the release of 1.0, which will be made available in 1.1. Version 1.1 will also implement a new Mac-like option interface, which has been the subject of much critisism from Windows and Linux users
"resync the code-base of the release builds with the core 'trunk'"?  "A new Mac-like option interface"?  Am I the only one who's confused?  If someone can edit the section and make its meaning just a little more clear, I think I can make it readable to the lay person.
Starwiz 18:46, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
:Compare Firefox 1.0.x with 1.1 (current nightlies) and you'll notice the difference of the option panels. It is now more Mac OS X-like. And basically there are two "lines" of codebase: aviary (Fx + Tb) and trunk (Moz?). Core changes including the Gecko engine are done on the trunk and application patches are done on the aviary builds. Correct me if I'm wrong. --minghong 18:12, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future Development section 

message: Just to let people know, the new nightly builds of Firefox, have changed in name and logo to Deer Park, the name fire fox is now obsolete, just like firebird and phoenix.
--Cloveious 07:12, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: well that's simply not true. Deer Park is the "nickname" of the 1.1 line of Firefox. These nicknames have been used to prevent ordinary users from using alpha-quality builds. - Xorx77 10:04, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Deer Park

message: "It uses the latest Gecko core (1.8b) as a basis, and features numerous bug fixes, partial support of SVG 1.1 and support of HTML canvas element."
What exactly is this?
:Google yourself. ;-) --minghong 04:28, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  HTML canvas element 

message: I'm fine with rm my input from that section, you're right it didn't quite fit there: I was trying to make note of how firefox will 'fit itself' into different OS - a small eye-candy issue I know with not a great deal to do with software,  maybe in third para. of Customizability Alf 11:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for removing. But this isn't not really about Firefox, but Winstripe (the default theme for Windows version of Firefox). Maybe we can mention that if there is an article for Winstripe… --minghong 16:07, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: No you're right, I jusy happened to notice it when putting it on Win98me, 2000 and XP OSs - I've a Debian with KDE, it 'melts' into that to. Alf 16:20, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  eye candy