3 ms·

As you've said: done right. Done poorly, or even in a mediocre fashion, and we've got more half-baked features and insufficiently-tested changes. Now, which s

As you've said: done right. Done poorly, or even in a mediocre fashion, and we've got more half-baked features and insufficiently-tested changes. Now, which scenario is more likely?

Vinnl 7y ago
Given Mozilla's track record of stability even for Nightly releases, I'd expect it to be done right.
jasonlotito 7y ago
If you are in a position to release every 4 weeks, then it doesn't matter. Release faster. A slower release schedule doesn't mean you have more testing time. It means you tend to release more in one feature. Further, because it takes longer to release, you run into a few problems. 1) People rush to get things into release because if they miss the release, they are waiting longer to get it out. If the release is every 4 weeks, a missed release is not as big a deal. 2) Long release cycles means things done early in the release get forgotten, so when it's finally released, they tend to be off people's minds. 3) Larger releases become harder to update and deploy. Larger file sizes, a lot more changes all at once. As someone who has done both (long and short release schedules) I can't imagine going back to long release schedules. It has a lot more complexity and is a lot more error prone than a shorter release schedule. Not only do you get the practice, but people are more inclined to wait until next release to get it right.
- cpeterso 7y ago
  > A slower release schedule doesn't mean you have more testing time. It means you tend to release more in one feature. Plus, most of the serious bugs are found right away when a new group of users starts testing, e.g. when Firefox Nightly version moves to Beta or Beta moves to stable Release. Firefox Nightly, Beta, and Release channels have very different user populations. They have different hardware (Nightly users are power users with big, fast machines), software (Release users are more likely to use anti-virus software or not have the latest GPU driver updates installed), and browsing usage. Mozilla's studies of crash rates and bug fixes for Firefox Beta showed that most of crashes and bugs are seen in the first two weeks or so. Having more beta "bake time" with a very long beta cycle has little benefit after the first batch of bugs are found and fixed. An interesting historical tidbit: about 60% of Firefox Beta users are in India and Indonesia. That is definitely not representative of Nightly or Release user populations! The apocryphal story is that many years ago, a local computer retailer started passing around copies of a beta CD of Firefox 4 so people didn't have to download it over a slow or metered internet. And then all those people are still on the Firefox Beta channel.

As you've said: done right. Done poorly, or even in a mediocre fashion, and we've got more half-baked features and insufficiently-tested changes. Now, which scenario is more likely?

Vinnl 7y ago

Given Mozilla's track record of stability even for Nightly releases, I'd expect it to be done right.

jasonlotito 7y ago

If you are in a position to release every 4 weeks, then it doesn't matter. Release faster. A slower release schedule doesn't mean you have more testing time. It means you tend to release more in one feature. Further, because it takes longer to release, you run into a few problems. 1) People rush to get things into release because if they miss the release, they are waiting longer to get it out. If the release is every 4 weeks, a missed release is not as big a deal. 2) Long release cycles means things done early in the release get forgotten, so when it's finally released, they tend to be off people's minds. 3) Larger releases become harder to update and deploy. Larger file sizes, a lot more changes all at once. As someone who has done both (long and short release schedules) I can't imagine going back to long release schedules. It has a lot more complexity and is a lot more error prone than a shorter release schedule. Not only do you get the practice, but people are more inclined to wait until next release to get it right.

cpeterso 7y ago
> A slower release schedule doesn't mean you have more testing time. It means you tend to release more in one feature. Plus, most of the serious bugs are found right away when a new group of users starts testing, e.g. when Firefox Nightly version moves to Beta or Beta moves to stable Release. Firefox Nightly, Beta, and Release channels have very different user populations. They have different hardware (Nightly users are power users with big, fast machines), software (Release users are more likely to use anti-virus software or not have the latest GPU driver updates installed), and browsing usage. Mozilla's studies of crash rates and bug fixes for Firefox Beta showed that most of crashes and bugs are seen in the first two weeks or so. Having more beta "bake time" with a very long beta cycle has little benefit after the first batch of bugs are found and fixed. An interesting historical tidbit: about 60% of Firefox Beta users are in India and Indonesia. That is definitely not representative of Nightly or Release user populations! The apocryphal story is that many years ago, a local computer retailer started passing around copies of a beta CD of Firefox 4 so people didn't have to download it over a slow or metered internet. And then all those people are still on the Firefox Beta channel.