Protocol: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* Sept 26th | * Sept 26th | ||
** set up test server for public eval | ** <strike>set up test server for public eval</strike> | ||
** set up test plan | ** <strike>set up test plan</strike> | ||
** refine code | ** <strike>refine code</strike> | ||
** public testing feedback and bug fixing | ** <strike>public testing feedback and bug fixing</strike> | ||
* Oct 3rd | * Oct 3rd | ||
** evaluate if ready for push to production | ** <strike>evaluate if ready for push to production</strike> | ||
** coordinate with IT to set up "production" instance | ** <strike>coordinate with IT to set up "production" instance</strike> | ||
= Bugs = | = Bugs = | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
= Notes = | = Notes = | ||
* Given that when we ship M8, the URL in question will be accessible from M8, but will simply fail to resolve or 404 (though I suppose we could easily enough put up a static web page), I'd argue that spending a week on testing this isn't really worth it, since the entire purpose here is simply to test Mozilla. I'd argue that once it seems to be working and we're convincedthere's no obvious huge security holes, we should just go live. --dmose | * Given that when we ship M8, the URL in question will be accessible from M8, but will simply fail to resolve or 404 (though I suppose we could easily enough put up a static web page), I'd argue that spending a week on testing this isn't really worth it, since the entire purpose here is simply to test Mozilla. I'd argue that once it seems to be working and we're convincedthere's no obvious huge security holes, we should just go live. --dmose | ||
= Presence in the Beta Review Guide = | |||
It's been suggested that we highlight web-based protocol handling in the beta review guide. For this, I think we want to do at least the following things: | |||
* warn IT that traffic might go up which could cause scaling issues | |||
* link to documentation (current MDC page, WhatWG page) | |||
* ping evang re web-based protocol handler tutorial pages | |||
Latest revision as of 17:48, 1 November 2007
Who
- ctalbert
- dmose
- morgamic
Schedule and Weekly Goals
- Sept 19th
review phpical codereview possible svn structurecheck it into svnwork on trimming it downfigure out threading concern / mutual exclusionnon-issue now
- Sept 26th
set up test server for public evalset up test planrefine codepublic testing feedback and bug fixing
- Oct 3rd
evaluate if ready for push to productioncoordinate with IT to set up "production" instance
Bugs
Background
Notes
- Given that when we ship M8, the URL in question will be accessible from M8, but will simply fail to resolve or 404 (though I suppose we could easily enough put up a static web page), I'd argue that spending a week on testing this isn't really worth it, since the entire purpose here is simply to test Mozilla. I'd argue that once it seems to be working and we're convincedthere's no obvious huge security holes, we should just go live. --dmose
Presence in the Beta Review Guide
It's been suggested that we highlight web-based protocol handling in the beta review guide. For this, I think we want to do at least the following things:
- warn IT that traffic might go up which could cause scaling issues
- link to documentation (current MDC page, WhatWG page)
- ping evang re web-based protocol handler tutorial pages