Looks like Mozilla did it again...

[Lootyhoof]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-575302 ... rity-flaw/

Sometimes it's better to actually properly test software than to just push it out.

[Moonchild]

I've also seen instabilities in the incremental GC in Firefox 16, so that leaves very little to write home about in this "major" release

"Rabid" release schedule strikes again. In case you haven't noticed, since about version 7.0, thoroughly field-testing the Mozilla browser has not been very high on Mozilla's agenda - cue all the .0.1 releases that are out there. A lot of them with known bugs that are never fixed because they are "pushed to the next release".

[Tallpaultn]

They certainly have plenty of company in releasing .0.1 versions--every browser I'm aware of does that including Pale Moon. They have now released version 16.0.1 to correct the issues with version 16.0.

[Moonchild]

Of course I've had a few "emergency fixes" that I needed to push out, as well - but you have to consider that the Pale Moon beta testing team, compared to Mozilla's, is extremely small; so it is much easier for something to slip under the radar.

[Tallpaultn]

Yes, we all make mistakes from time to time & must back-up & re-do things, not just Mozilla...

[Rohugh]

At least Mozilla picked it up and took steps to resolve it quickly, and yeah these things do happen occasionally.

[dark_moon]

Nobody is perfect, but mozilla have for every build so much alpha and beta versions and a lot of tester.

So this is a little but funny

[stravinsky]

AFAIUI, the "major security flaw" was more of a function that was supposed to be closed, but accidently remained open to access. This is indeed strange, as moz have lots of bug reports in all the release channels. Plus plenty of alpha testers.
Brendan Eich, inventor of Javascript, Spidermonkey JS engine, and CTO of Moz, is not too happy with the Rabid release schedule either.

[Blacklab]

....but you have to consider that the Pale Moon beta testing team, compared to Mozilla's, is extremely small; so it is much easier for something to slip under the radar.

The above can be read two ways:

EITHER - small is.... beautiful/perfectly formed/tight-knit team/easy to manage for MC, etc? ....In which case all is well and NFA is required!

OR - small is.... not big enough/rather less than ideal/could do with some more help, etc? ....In which case:

I'm looking for more people for closed beta testing of the browser. Interested? Register on the forum and send me a PM with your system specs and why you think you would make a good beta tester! http://forum.palemoon.org/

There are a few forum posts/replies if you do a search for "beta testers" or similar. Assuming the offer of more help (perhaps even a standby/waiting list?) would be good then I wonder how many people, like me, read the above and then dismiss the idea because they create an "imaginary" Requirement Specification for the "ideal beta-tester" - decide they don't match their "imaginary" spec and so don't apply?

Would it be possible to post an approximate "real" Pale Moon Beta-tester Requirement Specification somewhere - perhaps in FAQ's? It could include; minimum system hardware/software specs (if any), technical knowledge/previous experience required/preferred (if any), an outline of what is expected, likely time commitment, the need to be a Pale Moon "Power User" (lots of open tabs/video watching?) or not, and no doubt a few other things?

[Moonchild]

A beta-tester requirement spec would be the exact scenario where potentially valuable testers would dismiss the idea.

The thing is, for Pale Moon testing, diversity is all-important. There is no "ideal" beta tester.

The only common-sense requirements for beta testers are:

• Some free time to participate. Daily browsing, some stress tests, some benchmarks.
• Some self-discipline: regular back-ups of software, regular hardware and system checks.
• Able to deal with potentially frustrating problems. Sometimes beta versions will completely screw up your profile, cause blue screens, etc.
• Previous beta testing experience is a plus, but not required. It's mostly about attitude and being able to give accurate reports.
• Be (almost) fluent in English.

There are no minimum system requirements, apart from being able to run the version of Pale Moon being developed.

[Blacklab]

@ Moonchild: I take your point but seen "through the looking-glass" it could be a version of the old "chicken and egg" story - are you losing more potentially valuable testers by not putting something up - even if it is only the "common-sense requirements for beta testers" you have just listed? The most obvious advantage would be a permanent "Beta-testers Advertisement" + point of reference/howto for any member/visitor to the forum to see?

PS. Entirely off-topic: While looking for "more beta-testers" Facebook post I came across "The about box background image in Pale Moon." picture posted as a "clean" image on Facebook on 24 March - very pretty indeed! Is this is a composite or an unusual depth of field effect?

[Moonchild]

"Through the looking glass" from my side: Your first point made, a small but dedicated team being much easier to manage.

The About box image is a composite; in fact half-painted.