Re: Rapid development leads to many incompatible AddOns
Alexander Surkov <[email protected]> Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mozilla.accessibility |
|---|---|
| Organization | http://groups.google.com |
| Message-ID | <c16e5d62-5797-4aa3-ad39-d447f3011151@p11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> |
On Oct 8, 10:20 pm, Jamal Mazrui <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree that the major version changes have been coming too quickly with > Firefox and Thunderbird. Among other things, the changes have been > breaking accessibility with screen readers. > > Jamal > > On 10/8/2011 7:59 AM, McGyver008 wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi to all, > > > directly spoken: One of the most interesting features of FF - the > > AddOn's - get more and more often problems because of the method(s) of > > FF's development. > > > Although development in general is necessary, of course and very > > important.. but I don't understand, why some basic functionality (for > > example some interface modules als well as JavaScript, I assume) > > changes that quickly. > > > Many AddOn's need significantly more time for updates and in the > > moment even some well-known AddOn's like DownThemAll do only support > > FF 6.X, although there are 4 (!) complete new 'levels' of FF versions > > in nightly available (7.x, 8.x, 9.x, 10.x). Even the releases begin to > > outspace some AddOn's. > > > Ok, my question: Why is it necessary to change so many aspects in a > > way, that make make it essential to rewrite so many AddOn's with every > > new 'major version step' (e.g. 6.x to 7.x)? I don't understand, why it > > is so important to make several steps during one year (it is really > > very strange - sorry - to see FF versions ranging between 3.x and 10.x > > in use... even though some of them are only nightly's and some others > > are known to be outdated... it looks like an inflation in versions). > > Well done software need to be updated as well, but not permanently > > from ground up - sorry. It looks like there is a preference in > > development... and speed in development seems to beat quality > > completely. Can this really be a good idea...? > > _______________________________________________ > > dev-accessibility mailing list > > [email protected] > >https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-accessibility Hi, Jamal. What kind of problems of screen readers support can you see because of rapid release cycle? Alexander.