Thanks to Firefox we were able to receive huge amount of testers and prove that Gecko is a mature engine ready for use in mainstream tools like web browser or mail client.
One interesting fact is that Firefox 1.0 release did not influence our overall bugzilla numbers much.
Another, that this release slowed down our release timeframe a bit.
Look at this table:
| Release date | Gecko version | Opera version |
|---|---|---|
| 06.2002 | 1.0 | |
| 08.2002 | 1.1 [+2] | |
| 11.2002 | 1.2 [+3] | |
| 01.2003 | 7.0 | |
| 04.2003 | 1.3 [+5] | 7.1 [+3] |
| 06.2003 | 1.4 [+2] | |
| 09.2003 | 7.2 [+5] | |
| 10.2003 | 1.5 [+4] | |
| 01.2004 | 1.6 [+3] | |
| 05.2004 | 7.5 [+8] | |
| 06.2004 | 1.7 (Fx 1.0) [+5] | |
| 04.2005 | 8.0 [+9] | |
| 09.2005 | 8.5 [+5] | |
| ~11.2005 | 1.8 (Fx 1.5) [+17] | |
| Q4 2006 | 1.9 [~12] | |
| (?) | 2.0 |
The slowdown is a result of Firefox 1.0 release and that MoFo focused much on Firefox code, leaving Gecko a lower on priority list.
The question is if MoFo will want to release 1.9 with Firefox 2.0 (Q4 2006) or release it sooner and get Gecko 2.0 with Fx 2.0.
update: After reading (kudoz to Bablefish) Pascal’s comment, I added Opera’s numbers. There is additional difference that Opera releases minor versions with new features which keeps media on line.