- 1 Projeto 2010 Goals
Projeto 2010 Goals
- Parte do projeto Mozilla 2010 Goals
Linha do tempo - discussões
20 November 2008 - Sao Carlos discussion at University of Sao Paulo ICMC
Participe da sessão interativa Mozilla 2010 Goals nesta Quinta-feira as 21:00 no auditório do ICMC USP em São Carlos. O projeto 2010 Goals tem o objetivo organizar e documentar um conjunto de discussões para definir metas para os próximos 2 anos do projeto Mozilla. Existe um processo organizado por líderes da fundação Mozilla e diversos contribuidores que estão auxiliando na execução destas discussões pelo mundo. O Brasil  é um dos países ou constituições participantes. A semente deste projeto inicia-se com a pergunta: ”What can Mozilla do with our products and our product development processes to move the Internet toward our vision of an open, decentralized, participatory place in the next two years?” Para ajudar as discussão e busca das respostas estamos seguindo um modelo do tipo " preencha as metas " -- referido como Goals no projeto. Este modelo sugere áreas principais. Nas sessões de discussões podemos sempre documentar outras coisas, caso algo não se encaixe. Segue abaixo estas Goals: * Internet as Centerpiece * Data * Mobile * Mindshare * Beyond Products ( foundation ) Veja descrição das Metas iniciais no Wiki Goals. A sessão em São Carlos será uma discussão aberta, com breve introdução do formato e metas iniciais apresentadas para iniciar discussões. Os resultados da sessão serão documentados e publicados no Wiki 2010 Goals e compartilhados. O modelo da sessão será utilizado para que outros contribuidores possam melhorar ou criar outras sessões em outras localidades.  Semente 2010 Goals - http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/09/10/2010-goals/  Wiki Process - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Project/2010_Goals  Brazilian participation - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Project/2010_Goals/Coordinators  Initial Goals Description - https://wiki.mozilla.org/Project/2010_Goals#Goals
Sao Carlos annotation - draft - marcio
- Standards not a bit fight in long term;
- User Experience becomes differential;
User Experience Market
- FF retain users because user relies on extension. Someone reported that has not moved to Chrome due to certain extensions not in place with Chrome;
- Dilvan - power to select VM as VM JS modularization and standarzation matures;
- This case discussion was expanded to extensions as well, a possible extension to also work in another browser?;
Openness and Identity
- Fabricio - I do not see many distributed versions of Firefox. And if the goal is to really not be centralized or have more participation, there are good example of projects which are distributed - some Linux distribution;
- Today what could be distributions are Iceweasel, Firefox, and Seamonkey?? as the only things that seems to be based in the same; And to be really open would need to open a bit; Impression that Firefox is only from Mozilla foundation is strong;
- Chrome documentation on the fork is simple to understand; In the chrome space the core is chromeium;
- Marcio - yeah its possible to point to *chromium*, there is an identity of the soul project while in the mozilla space this is ffuzzy somehow Gecko and/or XULRunner and/or a "anedoctal modified Firefox".
- Fabricio - Extension support and culture keeps Firefox culture stronger;
- Pumba - Extensions combined adds value of the separations and variations while to have 2 or more Firefox browsers would be tricky to switch;
More no the Competing Firefoxes
- Fabricio - Why you cannot have multiple Firefox competing?
- Dilvan - one Linux distribution with 80% improves compatibility; One aspect is the power of the high usage to improve que project;
- Grillo - the disadvantage is that the top could be barrier to something new;
- Others Extensions are means in the moment to keep the water calm; Which represents a level of flexibility for variations at the level of User Experience; So someone willing to fork a new UI can pretty much do it via extensions;
- Gomes - The same helps solidification/unification of the culture around the name - Firefox;
- Pumba - Advantage of lots of Linuxes. I use a distribution with not many dominants using but I find really fine for me, as a computer science person -- high customization profile;
- Galli - you have the power of communication when you have maturity in the keywords and expectations. You know what you are talking so communication on the Web can help build things; install extension A, remove B; Oh well that is FF + A - B;
- Dilvan - wants stronger player in the market which helps. Linux is too fragmented and still breaks if tends to be extreme distribution;
- Marcio - is it possible the existance of multiple cultural markets or worlds which can be safe?
- Galli - what would be the results if we had an identity, concrete piece of browser that empowers Firefox?
Centerpiece and Vital
- Clauber - Python story was a case going;
- Dilvan - The same with Offline Support in Firefox Dilvan -Would it be possible to support Gears? what is the scenario there?
- Gomes/Galli - WHATWG offline importance as unification;
- Fabricio - Mozilla decides today that.
- Fabricio - It's very open you can participate, but in the end of the day the decisionis made by accepted by group and merit-based model;
- Gomes - Mitchell said that one point is how the decision making process to be more participative;
- Gomes - more participation in the decision making review, and how easy is to you to go out of the project in case your ideas is not going through. These are two different things;
Certain Modules distributed may fall as separated projects
Examples current are:
- Someone - Ubuntu - lots of components with separated projects;
- Galli - The more the modules and under components are separated as other projects, the mode would be the potential for the standarzation of the middleware bridge in the components?