Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Aug 2010 19:21 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 438257
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-12
Can I assume that was a indirect reference to the little flamewar related to the new bullshit stance on 915?
Or as I call it (and said on bugzilla) "How about before you start implementing specifications that aren't even out of draft you finish off specifications that have been recommendations for over a decade?"
Welcome to the reality of open source -- if it's not flashy or trendy, and a coder can't toot their own horn over it, and it's not quite big enough for people to give money to set a bounty on it, don't plan on it EVER being fixed.
Which of course is how TWELVE YEAR OLD entries like bugzilla 915 are shuffled around with half assed status changes, until we get the current "Who gives a ****" status of "irrelevant"
So not only is firefux the same fat slow unstable pig it's always been, they've now pretty much said they could give a shit about the existing finalized standards and instead only care about specs not even out of draft... in other words crap like CSS3 and HTML5 which nobody has ANY ***** BUSINESS USING ON PRODUCTION WEBSITES.
After all, that's what DRAFT means! I swear, it's IE 5 all over again.
Edited 2010-08-26 03:14 UTC