4 ms·

"Pushed hard", since the feature made it all the way to production versions which rolled out to every firefox user. This is a significant business decision whic

by volaski 11y ago

"Pushed hard", since the feature made it all the way to production versions which rolled out to every firefox user. This is a significant business decision which can change people's perception towards Mozilla. It definitely did for me. It IS a big deal that a popular browser supports some obscure 3rd party service as primary bookmarking service when there are many other 3rd party bookmarking services in the market such as Instapaper.

Manishearth 11y ago
> since the feature made it all the way to production versions which rolled out to every firefox user ...like most other features. Doesn't require pushing. That's how it works. > obscure 3rd party service Apparently it was a rather popular addon in Firefox?
- volaski 11y ago
  > since the feature made it all the way to production versions which rolled out to every firefox user ...like most other features. Doesn't require pushing. That's how it works. ==> Do we really need to define what "pushing" means? I'm sure you know what I mean by pushing, you're just doing wordplay. That's not how it works. > obscure 3rd party service Apparently it was a rather popular addon in Firefox? ==> What do you think the ratio of (# of pocket extension users / # of total firefox users) is? It's totally fine if FF had supported it as a pure "extension" (doesn't come preinstalled but required users to search and "pull" themselves if they wanted) but the criticism came from the fact that this 3rd party extension came preinstalled and was "pushed" to users.
  - Manishearth 11y ago
    > I'm sure you know what I mean by pushing, you're just doing wordplay. That's not how it works. No, I don't. They did with Pocket what they do with every nontrivial feature. Implemented it, and sherriffed it through the release trains. I don't think it was immediately plopped on a Firefox release, I recall seeing it on Developer/Aurora much earlier, which means it went through the release trains like everything else. The OP said, quote, "so why was Pocket pushed _so hard_ and couldn't wait a couple of Fx versions". How was it "pushed" "hard" if they did the _same thing_ they do for other features? Yes, they made the decision to implement this feature. That doesn't count as pushing. I already illustrated why that decision made sense at the time. Perhaps there was some backlash as it was on Aurora/Beta, I don't recall the exact timelines. IMO it's still okay to let the feature -- one which you still think makes sense and would benefit the userbase -- continue to ride the trains and hit a release while you try to understand the criticism and come up with a solution. It may be a better solution to disable it until a decision is made, but that depends on the perceived severity of the problem. Again, I don't see any hard pushing here, just a somewhat justifiable choice. I too would have preferred if they removed the feature when there was backlash, but I don't see anything wrong with the other solution. If you immediately backtracked every time there was criticism nothing would get done. > but the criticism came from the fact that this 3rd party extension came preinstalled and was "pushed" to users. Sure. But you gave the example of Instapaper (which you seem to be more okay with Firefox integrating with); I'm suggesting it was probably less popular than Pocket in FF or at least comparable popularity. I'm not disagreeing that integrating with a closed third party service is not good. I'm just pointing out a flaw in your Instapaper comment.
    - cpeterso 11y ago
      From what I remember, Pocket was "fast tracked" to the Firefox 38 Beta channel just a couple weeks before release. It did not ride the trains from Nightly to Aurora to Beta. This was controversial within Mozilla. We have the pre-release channels for good reasons. The Pocket tracking bug was filed in April 2015 [1] but the feature shipped with Firefox 38.0.5 in June 2015, just two months later. [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=pocket#c0 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=pocket#c0
      - mook 11y ago
        Wasn't it fast tracked into the release channel? That is, 38.0.5 would have been a patch release on top of 38.0.4. On the bright side, that has lead to a more serious look at shipping parts of the browser as first-party extensions. I'm very much looking forward to that, even if I end up leaving all of them on.
        cpeterso 11y ago
        I see what you mean. 38.0.5 was a special marketing release to promote Pocket and new Hello features. You can see on Mozilla ftp server that the version numbers of the 38.0 patch releases jump from 38.0.1 to 38.0.5 (leaving room for any emergency patch releases of 38.0.1): https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ 38.0 was released on 2015-05-12. 38.0.5 then sat in the Beta channel for two weeks of testing and then it was released on 2015-06-02: https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease/Calendar#Past_branch_dates https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease/Calendar#Past_branch_d...
      - Manishearth 11y ago
        TIL. Thanks for the info :) I think I've seen this done for other features in the past, but yeah, this doesn't sit well with me. (Still mostly okay with it though)
    - volaski 11y ago
      I realize this conversation is going nowhere since you decide to interpret things in ways that fit your argument just to fight, which is why I said you're just word-playing. I will go ahead and answer but you will probably disagree anyway: I didn't say I'm ok with them implementing Instapaper, and I definitely never said Instapaper is more popular. Go back and read again. I just pointed out how picking a single 3rd party service--NOT developed by Mozilla--and promoting it to the entire user base when there's a whole industry of read-it-later service ecosystem out there is a "non-trivial" issue, just like you even wrote. Therefore it would have been the same if they implemented Instapaper only, just like they did with Pocket only. And like you admitted, it is a "non trivial" feature, and in my book, when a feature is shipped and it's non-trivial, it was "pushed hard". This is again where you decide to disagree based on your own definition of "pushed hard". Your interpretation of "push" is intentionally narrow to only fit your interest. The original commenter and I simply pointed out how a non trivial feature like this was "promoted" (pushed) to users in an unusual way. Any decision to highlight a 3rd party product inside your main product (such as Firefox featuring Yahoo or Google as main home page) is a big deal, and just like how I would consider FF implementing Yahoo as homepage "pushing hard", I consider Pocket bookmarklet incident "pushing hard". You probably know what I'm trying to say but are just arguing based on semantics of these words.
Ygg2 11y ago
That's not true at all. Bookmarks are as far as I can tell separate from Pocket. Pocket is a read later extension.
- volaski 11y ago
  What's not true at all? When you say something is not true at all, you need to specify what exactly you are referring to. I mentioned several points in my comment. "Extension" is something that you extend your browser with and doesn't come pre-installed.
unethical_ban 11y ago
I guarantee you most Firefox users either use Pocket, or don't care that it's a default feature in the product now. I am in the boat that wishes it was removable, perhaps as some kind of "default add-on", but it's not. I'm not removing FF because of it. And as for ads: Were they tracking people with them? Were they sending back GUIDs of my browser every time I loaded a new tab? This is a legit question that would affect my opinion on the matter. The ads I see are brief, and cannot take more than a miniscule amount of data to serve. By those metrics, I have no problem with them.
- volaski 11y ago
  I didn't remove FF because of it either, but these things pile up slowly--makes me think WTF were they thinking?--and if I see several more of these I will probably stop using it. As I mentioned in another thread somewhere, I agree a lot of people don't care or not aware, but if asked directly "would you rather have this Pocket extension come pre-installed or not?" I am sure majority of them would say they don't want it. Just because people don't complain doesn't mean they're fine with it. People live with shitty customer service from comcast but that doesn't mean they have good customer service.

by volaski 11y ago

Manishearth 11y ago

> since the feature made it all the way to production versions which rolled out to every firefox user ...like most other features. Doesn't require pushing. That's how it works. > obscure 3rd party service Apparently it was a rather popular addon in Firefox?

volaski 11y ago
> since the feature made it all the way to production versions which rolled out to every firefox user ...like most other features. Doesn't require pushing. That's how it works. ==> Do we really need to define what "pushing" means? I'm sure you know what I mean by pushing, you're just doing wordplay. That's not how it works. > obscure 3rd party service Apparently it was a rather popular addon in Firefox? ==> What do you think the ratio of (# of pocket extension users / # of total firefox users) is? It's totally fine if FF had supported it as a pure "extension" (doesn't come preinstalled but required users to search and "pull" themselves if they wanted) but the criticism came from the fact that this 3rd party extension came preinstalled and was "pushed" to users.
- Manishearth 11y ago
  > I'm sure you know what I mean by pushing, you're just doing wordplay. That's not how it works. No, I don't. They did with Pocket what they do with every nontrivial feature. Implemented it, and sherriffed it through the release trains. I don't think it was immediately plopped on a Firefox release, I recall seeing it on Developer/Aurora much earlier, which means it went through the release trains like everything else. The OP said, quote, "so why was Pocket pushed _so hard_ and couldn't wait a couple of Fx versions". How was it "pushed" "hard" if they did the _same thing_ they do for other features? Yes, they made the decision to implement this feature. That doesn't count as pushing. I already illustrated why that decision made sense at the time. Perhaps there was some backlash as it was on Aurora/Beta, I don't recall the exact timelines. IMO it's still okay to let the feature -- one which you still think makes sense and would benefit the userbase -- continue to ride the trains and hit a release while you try to understand the criticism and come up with a solution. It may be a better solution to disable it until a decision is made, but that depends on the perceived severity of the problem. Again, I don't see any hard pushing here, just a somewhat justifiable choice. I too would have preferred if they removed the feature when there was backlash, but I don't see anything wrong with the other solution. If you immediately backtracked every time there was criticism nothing would get done. > but the criticism came from the fact that this 3rd party extension came preinstalled and was "pushed" to users. Sure. But you gave the example of Instapaper (which you seem to be more okay with Firefox integrating with); I'm suggesting it was probably less popular than Pocket in FF or at least comparable popularity. I'm not disagreeing that integrating with a closed third party service is not good. I'm just pointing out a flaw in your Instapaper comment.
  - cpeterso 11y ago
    From what I remember, Pocket was "fast tracked" to the Firefox 38 Beta channel just a couple weeks before release. It did not ride the trains from Nightly to Aurora to Beta. This was controversial within Mozilla. We have the pre-release channels for good reasons. The Pocket tracking bug was filed in April 2015 [1] but the feature shipped with Firefox 38.0.5 in June 2015, just two months later. [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=pocket#c0 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=pocket#c0
    - mook 11y ago
      Wasn't it fast tracked into the release channel? That is, 38.0.5 would have been a patch release on top of 38.0.4. On the bright side, that has lead to a more serious look at shipping parts of the browser as first-party extensions. I'm very much looking forward to that, even if I end up leaving all of them on.
      - cpeterso 11y ago
        I see what you mean. 38.0.5 was a special marketing release to promote Pocket and new Hello features. You can see on Mozilla ftp server that the version numbers of the 38.0 patch releases jump from 38.0.1 to 38.0.5 (leaving room for any emergency patch releases of 38.0.1): https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ 38.0 was released on 2015-05-12. 38.0.5 then sat in the Beta channel for two weeks of testing and then it was released on 2015-06-02: https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease/Calendar#Past_branch_dates https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease/Calendar#Past_branch_d...
    - Manishearth 11y ago
      TIL. Thanks for the info :) I think I've seen this done for other features in the past, but yeah, this doesn't sit well with me. (Still mostly okay with it though)
  - volaski 11y ago
    I realize this conversation is going nowhere since you decide to interpret things in ways that fit your argument just to fight, which is why I said you're just word-playing. I will go ahead and answer but you will probably disagree anyway: I didn't say I'm ok with them implementing Instapaper, and I definitely never said Instapaper is more popular. Go back and read again. I just pointed out how picking a single 3rd party service--NOT developed by Mozilla--and promoting it to the entire user base when there's a whole industry of read-it-later service ecosystem out there is a "non-trivial" issue, just like you even wrote. Therefore it would have been the same if they implemented Instapaper only, just like they did with Pocket only. And like you admitted, it is a "non trivial" feature, and in my book, when a feature is shipped and it's non-trivial, it was "pushed hard". This is again where you decide to disagree based on your own definition of "pushed hard". Your interpretation of "push" is intentionally narrow to only fit your interest. The original commenter and I simply pointed out how a non trivial feature like this was "promoted" (pushed) to users in an unusual way. Any decision to highlight a 3rd party product inside your main product (such as Firefox featuring Yahoo or Google as main home page) is a big deal, and just like how I would consider FF implementing Yahoo as homepage "pushing hard", I consider Pocket bookmarklet incident "pushing hard". You probably know what I'm trying to say but are just arguing based on semantics of these words.

Ygg2 11y ago

That's not true at all. Bookmarks are as far as I can tell separate from Pocket. Pocket is a read later extension.

volaski 11y ago
What's not true at all? When you say something is not true at all, you need to specify what exactly you are referring to. I mentioned several points in my comment. "Extension" is something that you extend your browser with and doesn't come pre-installed.

unethical_ban 11y ago

I guarantee you most Firefox users either use Pocket, or don't care that it's a default feature in the product now. I am in the boat that wishes it was removable, perhaps as some kind of "default add-on", but it's not. I'm not removing FF because of it. And as for ads: Were they tracking people with them? Were they sending back GUIDs of my browser every time I loaded a new tab? This is a legit question that would affect my opinion on the matter. The ads I see are brief, and cannot take more than a miniscule amount of data to serve. By those metrics, I have no problem with them.

volaski 11y ago
I didn't remove FF because of it either, but these things pile up slowly--makes me think WTF were they thinking?--and if I see several more of these I will probably stop using it. As I mentioned in another thread somewhere, I agree a lot of people don't care or not aware, but if asked directly "would you rather have this Pocket extension come pre-installed or not?" I am sure majority of them would say they don't want it. Just because people don't complain doesn't mean they're fine with it. People live with shitty customer service from comcast but that doesn't mean they have good customer service.