200454 - Milestone 1.5 (or 1.6) to be re-named 2.0 following new Roadmap - when transition is complete

Status: VERIFIED INVALID

(SeaMonkey :: General, enhancement)

Description

[P h i l l]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312

In light of the new Roadmap posted http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html I feel we
need to rename the 1.5 to 2.0 to reflect the dramatic change in Mozilla.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Comment 1

[David Eccles]

Major changes should involve changes in the major version number. I would vote
for this if I could...

From http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/votehelp.html :

Click on the "Vote for this bug" link that appears just above the "Additional
Comments" field. (If no such link appears, then voting may not be allowed in
this bug's product.)

Comment 2

[P h i l l]

Changing Product to Browser to allow voting...

Comment 3

[Andreas Otte]

I don't think we should change 1.5 into 2.0. I think this change will take time
and some release before being complete. Lets move to 2.0 (maybe from 1.7) when
the change is done, not at the beginning of the changes.
 

Comment 4

[P h i l l]

I've re-worded the summary to reflect that "1.5" relates to the finished
release/implementation of the new roadmap.  If this only happens as what is now
labelled "1.6" then release "1.5" should be labelled as a pre-2.0 build.

Comment 5

[Jason Bassford]

Making some obvious changes here - this is All/All and should be "Trunk".  Also,
this is *not* a Tracking bug, so changing it to Browser-General since there is
no component available for something like this.

However, I suspect that this bug is INVALID.  I don't believe that this is the
kind of the thing (an internal mozilla.org decision) that can be determined by a
Bugzilla database entry.

Comment 6

[Prognathous]

The new name for Phoenix is supposed to be announced by the end of the week, but
there is no chance that it can beat "Mozilla 2.0". I say: stop the press!

Prog.

Comment 7

[Hixie (not reading bugmail)]

The version number shouldn't be decided ahead of time. We'll switch to 2.0 when
we think we're ready, not on a timetable decided even before work has begun.

Comment 8

[Prognathous]

v2.0 could signify a fresh start, but IMO the version is not as important as the
name. "Mozilla" has gained credibility over the years, why start from scratch?
it would be much more effective to simply rename "Phoenix" to "Mozilla" (or to
"Mozilla browser").

JM2NIS,

Prog.

Comment 9

[David Hallowell]

The name mozilla will still exist, as for the version number I agree with Hixie.
Let the drivers decide the version numbers, one of the main problems with the
Mozilla project is the time wasted by arguning over extremely trivial things in
Bugzilla which isn't the ideal place for this sort of discussion (newsgroups are
a better idea)

Comment 10

[Mark Jones]

I find this silly.  Isn't 1.4 by definition "pre-2.0"?

I mean, the pre-1.0 were numbered 0.x and only became 1.0 when the product was
ready.  Starting a non-stable codebase one a x.0 seems pretty darn dumb.

Comment 11

[David Eccles]

Of course Moz shouldn't ship with a new major number (like 2.0) being really
buggy. I guess that is the reason for the "when transition is complete" bit in
this bug's description. I don't really mind the 1.x version numbers for the test
versions. Once Mozilla's multi-app version becomes stable enough to package and
advertise to the world, then Mozilla 2.0 is born. I can't at the moment see what
other changes could be more major than this split (although I am not thinking
much right now.

Comment 12

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

Yes, I agree. If the transition is complete at a certain point and the browser
appears significantly improved, we can release 2.0 early (maybe instead of 1.8).
Otherwise, we will need to go 1.10, 1.11, 1.12, 1.13, etc ;-)

I think that we have already made a name for ourselves, and that 2.0 should
really kick some major ass and be signficantly different as a major version,
otherwise people will start to lose interest in new versions of Mozilla, just as
Netscape 4 and IE had caused people to lose interest in upgrading their browsers
because they were almost identical each time.

The architecture change will most likely bring out new issues that won't be
known immediately, so we will have to wait to see what fallout it causes, and
until we have gotten back to fixing bugs again. Also, users will want to see
something significantly changed for a 2.0 version. "Mozilla has a significant
architecture change" will mean nothing to people who just use Mozilla.