>The new release model is bullshit, since it carries no information.
You're talking about the versioning scheme, which I agree wasn't the best idea. However, the version number by itself never carries information. It's not an argument, it's nit-picking on trivial, completely unimportant details.
The release model itself (four channels, six weeks life cycle for release) is extremely good (there's a reason they copied it from Chrome, as much as I dislike the browser) and needed for a project such as Firefox. Longer release cycles just can't keep up with the development of the web in the long run, and provide much less direct feedback for the developers. Just calling it bullshit for no reason whatsoever is exactly the problem I was talking about.
You're talking about the versioning scheme, which I agree wasn't the best idea. However, the version number by itself never carries information. It's not an argument, it's nit-picking on trivial, completely unimportant details.
The release model itself (four channels, six weeks life cycle for release) is extremely good (there's a reason they copied it from Chrome, as much as I dislike the browser) and needed for a project such as Firefox. Longer release cycles just can't keep up with the development of the web in the long run, and provide much less direct feedback for the developers. Just calling it bullshit for no reason whatsoever is exactly the problem I was talking about.