Do you just not count UC? Servo? Do you think Edge costs $500MM a year to build, maintain and document?
-
-
There's also quite a bit spent on IT (afaict) because of aging internal infrastructure that doesn't even work that well.
-
From an employee standpoint, I see IT as better than anything I've experienced in my 18 years of Mozilla employment across three organizations. I'm especially proud of how we're able to support a globally distributed employee and volunteer base with great tools and other support.
-
As a "volunteer" (whatever the heck that means - it's not actually how other large OSS projects describe contributors), I'm delighted when the projects I work on use industry standard tools and frustrated when I need to interact with Mozilla's tools.
-
Can you say more about this? Do you mean "move to github already" or something else?
-
The way you asked that question doesn't make me optimistic about responding. It's not just github (although GitHub is empirically a huge boon for contributors), but CI tools and other aspects of the ecosystem.
-
There's nothing snowflake'y about Devtools, Rust, Servo. Large, distributed, global OSS projects in the wild operate with fewer bespoke tools.
-
And if Mozilla's tools are so great, a healthy, large ecosystem around them would make a big difference.
-
I'm no expert here, so I'll defer to any Mozilla build and ci folks who want to chime in, but making that tooling top notch is a priority, and we've got a decent sized and super smart group of people working on it. Perhaps that's why the cost is high :)
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think Mozilla should have been ahead of the game with "mobile" and I'm glad we're investing early in what might (or very well may not) be the next big thing. The platform side investment in things like the WebVR API seem reasonable to me.
-
It's already established that you find $500MM reasonable. Here's a question: why invest in the next big thing while still so far behind on the last thing? Why so little investment in a solid mobile story?
-
Frankly, we bet the farm on mobile with Firefox OS and it failed. That was orders of magnitude more expensive than what we're doing with mixed reality. We're refocused on mobile browsers now and they will be getting much better over the next year or two.
-
Why did FFOS failure mean an almost complete and total deinvestment in mobile at the time?
-
Firefox OS sucked up almost all the resources Mozilla had, pulling them not just from mobile, but from desktop and web platform. No one at Mozilla was exempted from being called on to stop what they were doing to work on something for OS. It was our "mobile investment".
-
This conversation started with a lot of criticism of FFOS. Yes, FFOS was a disaster. This kind of pendulum swing (BET THE FARM! NEVERMIND DEINVEST IN MOBILE!) is what's baffling
-
After Firefox OS, we were not only behind on mobile we were years behind on desktop too, where we owe it to hundreds of millions of users to not suck. We spent the last couple years getting desktop back into shape. Now we're increasing investment in mobile platform and browsers.
-
These are all good explanations from a 20,000 foot view in the abstract. Doesn't explain the Connected Devices boondoggle, internal resistance to servo, sudden large investment in MR, multi-million dollar all hands in expensive resort towns, executive infatuation with Davos, etc
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.