Now that's one of the worst attempts at spinning something I have ever read
Did you read the link?
In case you didn't, here's a bit more spin:-
"In every release cycle, everyone wants every bug to block a release and therefore everyone is 'blocker-happy,' and later in the cycle, all are changed to non-blocker status except the most critical as perceived by developers, drivers, and testers," writes Accettura. "[E]very bug you fix, feature you add introduces new code, which potentially causes new bugs in other places. Even if you devote 100% effort to fixing bugs, you'll likely never get there... Every project involves deciding what bugs ship, and what holds a release. Every single one. If there's someone who doesn't, it means their QA is likely flawed or inadequate."
In response to overblown concerns that a large number of Firefox's bugs will not be resolved, Firefox community coordinator Asa Dotzler has characterized such claims as "horses***." Dotzler points out that over 11,000 bugs reports and feature requests have already been closed and classified as fixed, a number that dwarfs the remaining 700 blockers.
Mozilla technical strategist Mike Shaver has also responded. "'Bug' in our world—as with with every software shop I've ever worked, to be honest—includes desired feature improvements, optimizations, basically everything in the gap between 'how the software is' and 'how someone would like the software to be'," explains Shaver. "Because of history and some tool limitations, and because we now have a larger set of people triaging blocker nominations than we ever have before, the 'blocking' flag doesn't always strictly mean 'we would not ship Firefox 3 if this specific bug isn't fixed."
Now it's obviously a beta that's out there, and many current extensions don't work with the new beta, but, as we know from so many discussions is this forum, that there are also at least 2 (50) sides to every argument, and that the original article about the 80% unfixed bugs came from a New York Times and was picked up and spread around without much thought. This is just a response to that. It's written on the 'ars technica' site, which is a respected technology site.
