Closed Bug 768086 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

Discussion Forum: mozilla.compatibility

Categories

(mozilla.org :: Discussion Forums, task)

Product:
mozilla.org
Component:
Discussion Forums
Platform:
All
Other
Type:
task
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: lmandel, Assigned: mburns)

References

Details

List Name: web-compat
List Admin: lmandel@mozilla.com, 

Short Description:
Web compatibility

Long Description:


Justification / Special Instructions:

Coordination of the Web compatibility effort, currently focused on mobile Web compat for B2G and Fennec.
We're making this a public forum I take it, right? Maybe something like mozilla.dev.web-compat?
Good catch Jason. The list name should definitely begin with mozilla. I'm fine with it being mozilla.dev.web-compat.
Great idea :-)

The mozilla.dev hierarchy is for code development. This isn't really QA either, so it doesn't fit under mozilla.qa. We have a mozilla.engagement.developer, which is for engaging web developers in general, but this is not quite that either.

Historically, this activity has been called "evangelism" or "tech evangelism", and that's what it's called in Bugzilla. I think there once was a mozilla.evangelism group, and there could be again, if you were happy with that name.

Gerv
Although this effort has a large evangelism component there is also a component that deals with updates to the Gecko platform - specifically in the layout and performance areas. This is why I submitted the request for web-compat.

I'm not hung up on any name. The important thing is that we get a public forum in which to have our conversations. What do others think about resurrecting mozilla.evangelism?
We've been using the term "evangelism" to mean speaking about Mozilla and it's mission, not just making websites compatible. As long as the name can encompass both ...
(In reply to Stormy Peters from comment #5)
> We've been using the term "evangelism" to mean speaking about Mozilla and
> it's mission, not just making websites compatible. As long as the name can
> encompass both ...

Might be better than to be explicit. mozilla.evangelism.mobile?
To me mobile evangelism includes promoting the product, not just making websites work with Fennec.
(In reply to Stormy Peters from comment #7)
> To me mobile evangelism includes promoting the product, not just making
> websites work with Fennec.

mozilla.evangelism.web?
(In reply to Stormy Peters from comment #5)
> We've been using the term "evangelism" to mean speaking about Mozilla and
> it's mission, not just making websites compatible. As long as the name can
> encompass both ...

I see the evangelism component of this effort as making Web sites compatible and educating Web developers about how to build mobile Web sites. Part of making Web sites compatible is certainly promoting our products. I think this type of discussion fits on this list as well.

(In reply to Jason Smith[:jsmith] from comment #6)
> (In reply to Stormy Peters from comment #5)
> > We've been using the term "evangelism" to mean speaking about Mozilla and
> > it's mission, not just making websites compatible. As long as the name can
> > encompass both ...
> 
> Might be better than to be explicit. mozilla.evangelism.mobile?

John and Stormy both made the point in e-mail that although we're currently focused on mobile there are still desktop issues. At some point we will likely circle back around there so it may make more sense to leave mobile out and make this a more generic compatibility list.

(In reply to Jason Smith [:jsmith] from comment #8)
> (In reply to Stormy Peters from comment #7)
> > To me mobile evangelism includes promoting the product, not just making
> > websites work with Fennec.
> 
> mozilla.evangelism.web?

Isn't Web implicit in everything Mozilla? :)
I think we are obsessing a bit here, but to me "evangelism" unnecessarily limits the discussion to "things that Mozilla can do to get others to change their behaviour". That is an important part of the the path before us, but as the recent discussion over UA strings and various animation and other properties shows, we have been and are going to continue to need to consider making compatibility changes in our own codebase. That is not evangelization -- it is design/coding work for product compatibility. 

I would rather go with Lawrence's original name (with or without the mozilla prefix). Any points that are discussed in there that are purely an issue of evangelization/messaging can be pushed out to other/better venues.
I'm not keen on abbreviations, particularly uncommon ones, in forum names, because it can be confusing to people for whom English is not a first language.

'Evangelism' of the product is surely a User Engagement matter? That would be mozilla.engagement.users, when and if they come along and ask for it.

If this group is covering all of website evangelism, and compatibility changes to the product, I'd go for "mozilla.compatibility" (A.K.A. compatibility@lists.mozilla.org).

Gerv
"mozilla.compatibility" (A.K.A. compatibility@lists.mozilla.org) wfm.
Over to server-ops for creation of mozilla.compatibility.

Gerv
Assignee: gerv → server-ops
Summary: Discussion Forum: web-compat → Discussion Forum: mozilla.compatibility
Assignee: server-ops → mburns
Thanks Gerv.

To be clear (as I know there was some issue with dev-privacy), this is a request for a public mailing list with archive.
Depends on: 770423
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/compatibility

:lmandel, you should have received an email with admin credentials. Currently we use Google Groups for our public archives, but we are working on including a natively-hosted archive as well.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Michael - I haven't received the e-mail with admin credentials. Is it possible to resend?
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/mozilla.compatibility says |There is no group named “mozilla.compatibility”.|
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.