Re: Tab group behavior a little off?
Rickles wrote: OS is WinXP Pro SP3, patched/updated. Browser is: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110813 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3 Have been using SM for years (thanks, devs), only upgraded from v2.0.14 to 2.3 as a full-install-overwrite last night. Home page: defined as a group of 4 tabs, all with the BBC (news, currencies, 2 x weather). When browser opens, home group opens as normal. If Home Group is already open and the Home button clicked, the focused-tab is overwritten with the first of the replacement group tabs, and the remaining 3 are added to what's there, so you end up with 7 tabs (3 pairs of duplicates and one single). This repeats arithmetically each time you click Home. If I close all but 1 tab and click Home, I end up with just the Home group of tabs. It makes no difference whether any of the existing tabs actually are still on the sites they originally opened up to (go shopping at Amazon on one, Google maps on another, etc.) all but 1 existing tab stay the same. That one is overwritten and 3 more added. My preference is for tab groups is to 'Replace existing tabs'. I have toggled this setting to 'Add...', closed SM and started over, then changed the setting back to 'Replace...', then restarted SM again but still the same. Add-on Compat. Reporter 0.8.7 is installed. I have 2 add-ons relating to tabs: IE Tab Plus and SeaTab X. Both are as current a version as can be had; Reporter says IE Tab Plus isn't any good, but SeaTab X is OK. I've disabled both and restarted SM, still same behavior. Three other add-ons are reported by Compat. Reporter as no good with SM 2.3, but disabling them didn't change anything, either. Other than this one issue, so far 2.3 appears stable. Thoughts? I have a group of five tabs for my homepage and just tried clicking on the browser icon twice from the mail newsgroup screen. Only ended up with the one set of tabs. Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110820 SeaMonkey/2.3.1 -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
czech language pack for 2.3
Hello, I'm encountering problems when trying to install the czech language pack, as per the link found in the downloads section of the seamonkey web site: http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/releases/2.3.1/langpack/seamonkey-2.3.1.cs.langpack.xpi Despite this language pack being labeled as 2.3.1, seamonkey will refuse to install it saying that it is not compatible with seamonkey 2.3. Any ideas about this problem? If this is not the right place to ask, does anyone know how the author of the language pack can be contacted? With regards, Michal Svoboda ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: czech language pack for 2.3
Michal Svoboda wrote: I'm encountering problems when trying to install the czech language pack, as per the link found in the downloads section of the seamonkey web site: http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/releases/2.3.1/langpack/seamonkey-2.3.1.cs.langpack.xpi Despite this language pack being labeled as 2.3.1, seamonkey will refuse to install it saying that it is not compatible with seamonkey 2.3. Ahoj, Michal : it worked for me. Seamonkey 2.3.1 under Windows/XP PRO;SP3 Philip Taylor ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: czech language pack for 2.3
Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: it worked for me. Seamonkey 2.3.1 under Windows/XP PRO;SP3 Does not work here. Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110817 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3 Please advise. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: czech language pack for 2.3
Your build identifier shews your browser as 2.3, not as 2.3.1, Michal : here is my build identifier -- Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110820 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3.1 Is it possible that the language pack is /only/ compatible with V2.3.1, and not with V2.3 ? If so, is there any reason why you could not upgrade to V2.3.1 ? Philip Taylor Michal Svoboda wrote: Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: it worked for me. Seamonkey 2.3.1 under Windows/XP PRO;SP3 Does not work here. Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110817 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3 Please advise. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: czech language pack for 2.3
Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: Is it possible that the language pack is /only/ compatible with V2.3.1, and not with V2.3 ? If so, is there any reason why you could not upgrade to V2.3.1 ? Hmm, you're right, it's a 2.3. Is there anyplace I could grab the language pack for 2.3? The site releases.mozilla.org only seems to have 2.2 and 2.3.1, so does any of its mirrors. (I'll upgrade to 2.3.1 when the package for my distro comes out, or if needed I might do it myself.) Michal Svoboda ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: czech language pack for 2.3
Michal Svoboda wrote: Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: Is it possible that the language pack is /only/ compatible with V2.3.1, and not with V2.3 ? If so, is there any reason why you could not upgrade to V2.3.1 ? Hmm, you're right, it's a 2.3. Is there anyplace I could grab the language pack for 2.3? That one I can't help you with, I am afraid : I am just a user, not anyone with inside knowledge of where things might be found. Philip Taylor ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: czech language pack for 2.3
Michal Svoboda schrieb: Hmm, you're right, it's a 2.3. Is there anyplace I could grab the language pack for 2.3? The site releases.mozilla.org only seems to have 2.2 and 2.3.1, so does any of its mirrors. ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/releases/2.3/langpack/seamonkey-2.3.cs.langpack.xpi Robert Kaiser -- Note that any statements of mine - no matter how passionate - are never meant to be offensive but very often as food for thought or possible arguments that we as a community should think about. And most of the time, I even appreciate irony and fun! :) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: czech language pack for 2.3
Robert Kaiser wrote: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/releases/2.3/langpack/seamonkey-2.3.cs.langpack.xpi Thanks that did it. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Email messages delete slow in 2.3
Paul B. Gallagher wrote: flyguy wrote: if you'd read his message... you'd know he already tried compact... Did he compact the Trash folder? I wasn't sure from his description if he'd done that. In every version of SeaMonkey I've ever had, telling the program to compact folders has resulted in compaction of all folders within the selected account, including Trash. But I suppose if he has it set up to direct deletions to Trash in a different account, compacting the source account would not affect that Trash folder. I see that you can now right-click a folder and tell the program to compact this folder, but that's new to me. I've always just done File | Compact Folders and gotten them all in one pass. I was astonished to read Justin's statement that compacting folders could take as long as an hour. In my experience, it's never taken more than about five minutes, and it usually takes less than two. And I'm not working with some ultrafast multi-CPU machine, but I do have folders with thousands of messages. It's my understanding that the process can be more effective if you File-Empty Trash before you Compact Folders. -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Tab group behavior a little off?
Daniel wrote: Rickles wrote: OS is WinXP Pro SP3, patched/updated. Browser is: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110813 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3 Have been using SM for years (thanks, devs), only upgraded from v2.0.14 to 2.3 as a full-install-overwrite last night. Home page: defined as a group of 4 tabs, all with the BBC (news, currencies, 2 x weather). When browser opens, home group opens as normal. If Home Group is already open and the Home button clicked, the focused-tab is overwritten with the first of the replacement group tabs, and the remaining 3 are added to what's there, so you end up with 7 tabs (3 pairs of duplicates and one single). This repeats arithmetically each time you click Home. If I close all but 1 tab and click Home, I end up with just the Home group of tabs. It makes no difference whether any of the existing tabs actually are still on the sites they originally opened up to (go shopping at Amazon on one, Google maps on another, etc.) all but 1 existing tab stay the same. That one is overwritten and 3 more added. My preference is for tab groups is to 'Replace existing tabs'. I have toggled this setting to 'Add...', closed SM and started over, then changed the setting back to 'Replace...', then restarted SM again but still the same. Add-on Compat. Reporter 0.8.7 is installed. I have 2 add-ons relating to tabs: IE Tab Plus and SeaTab X. Both are as current a version as can be had; Reporter says IE Tab Plus isn't any good, but SeaTab X is OK. I've disabled both and restarted SM, still same behavior. Three other add-ons are reported by Compat. Reporter as no good with SM 2.3, but disabling them didn't change anything, either. Other than this one issue, so far 2.3 appears stable. Thoughts? I have a group of five tabs for my homepage and just tried clicking on the browser icon twice from the mail newsgroup screen. Only ended up with the one set of tabs. Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110820 SeaMonkey/2.3.1 The first time you clicked on the browser icon, it opened your browser home page group of tabs. If you don't close the browser window but don try the browser icon again, SM is smart enough not to open a new window, 'cause one's already open. What we're describing as faulty is what happens when you click on your browser's Home button when tabs are already open--if your preferences are set for the tab group to REPLACE what's already open, it still ADDS to what's open, instead. So if you have the Home group open and then click on Home again, you get duplicates. And the SMv 2.3.1 had no effect on this, it's the same since v2.1. But v2.0.14 doesn't do it. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: A plea for a return to sanity in new version release scheduling
John wrote: I use SeaMonkey most of the time and Firefox occasionally. I try never to use IE. The web browser and email client are critically important to me, and I think the majority of users would agree. Since Firefox and SeaMonkey embarked on their accelerated release schedule, we've seen several updates incorporating many significant behavioral changes which are causing grief to many users. Along with this we are being encouraged to upgrade promptly because that's the only way to get the latest security patches. Why the big hurry all of a sudden? Changes in program behavior should be fully documented in advance of an upgrade. Users who prefer the behavior of the old version should be given the option to retain it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! The end user should not be forced to be the guinea pig whose feedback becomes the quality control for these programs. Please return to the former more careful release strategy. I worked as an electrical engineer for Motorola for many years. All too often, we had products being sold before they were designed and unrelenting pressure to push them out the door. There's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over was the cynical opinion of many of my colleagues. It seems like the software industry is the same way. Is it really rapid-release?? SeaMonkey 1.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.0.9 - twelve releases over twenty months. SeaMonkey 1.1 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.1.19 - twenty two releases over forty three months. SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 - twenty two releases over thirty months. Should the question really be *What's the difference??* -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Tab group behavior a little off?
Rickles wrote: Daniel wrote: Rickles wrote: OS is WinXP Pro SP3, patched/updated. Browser is: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110813 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3 Have been using SM for years (thanks, devs), only upgraded from v2.0.14 to 2.3 as a full-install-overwrite last night. Home page: defined as a group of 4 tabs, all with the BBC (news, currencies, 2 x weather). When browser opens, home group opens as normal. If Home Group is already open and the Home button clicked, the focused-tab is overwritten with the first of the replacement group tabs, and the remaining 3 are added to what's there, so you end up with 7 tabs (3 pairs of duplicates and one single). This repeats arithmetically each time you click Home. If I close all but 1 tab and click Home, I end up with just the Home group of tabs. It makes no difference whether any of the existing tabs actually are still on the sites they originally opened up to (go shopping at Amazon on one, Google maps on another, etc.) all but 1 existing tab stay the same. That one is overwritten and 3 more added. My preference is for tab groups is to 'Replace existing tabs'. I have toggled this setting to 'Add...', closed SM and started over, then changed the setting back to 'Replace...', then restarted SM again but still the same. Add-on Compat. Reporter 0.8.7 is installed. I have 2 add-ons relating to tabs: IE Tab Plus and SeaTab X. Both are as current a version as can be had; Reporter says IE Tab Plus isn't any good, but SeaTab X is OK. I've disabled both and restarted SM, still same behavior. Three other add-ons are reported by Compat. Reporter as no good with SM 2.3, but disabling them didn't change anything, either. Other than this one issue, so far 2.3 appears stable. Thoughts? I have a group of five tabs for my homepage and just tried clicking on the browser icon twice from the mail newsgroup screen. Only ended up with the one set of tabs. Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110820 SeaMonkey/2.3.1 The first time you clicked on the browser icon, it opened your browser home page group of tabs. If you don't close the browser window but don try the browser icon again, SM is smart enough not to open a new window, 'cause one's already open. What we're describing as faulty is what happens when you click on your browser's Home button when tabs are already open--if your preferences are set for the tab group to REPLACE what's already open, it still ADDS to what's open, instead. So if you have the Home group open and then click on Home again, you get duplicates. And the SMv 2.3.1 had no effect on this, it's the same since v2.1. But v2.0.14 doesn't do it. Sorry, poor explanation on my part! I was in SM Mail News, clicked the icon for SM browser, my five site Home group opened, without closing anything I switched back to Mail News and re-clicked the Browser icon.still just the five sites showing up. O.K., so this time I had Mail News open, clicked on the Browser icon in the bottom left, Five Sites Home Group opened in the browser. So this time I clicked on the Browser Icon in the bottom left of the Browser Screenand got a second Browser screen with my five tabs. In Edit-Preferences-Browser-Link Behavior, I've got Links from other applications set to A new tab in the current window. -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Seamonkey 2.2 to 2.3.1 Fer it or Again it?
So I got 2.2, a huge disappointment with lots of annoying bugs in mail and one big one in web (RMB context menu bug). The new level of issues makes me scared to update, even though this is the most buggy version of since perhaps Moz 0.6. So what are the big new 2.3.1 issues that were not in 2.2? Should I be scared or should I update? I have never had an update before 2.2 that I questioned going back before. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: A plea for a return to sanity in new version release scheduling
On 8/29/2011 8:16 AM, Daniel wrote: John wrote: I use SeaMonkey most of the time and Firefox occasionally. I try never to use IE. The web browser and email client are critically important to me, and I think the majority of users would agree. Since Firefox and SeaMonkey embarked on their accelerated release schedule, we've seen several updates incorporating many significant behavioral changes which are causing grief to many users. Along with this we are being encouraged to upgrade promptly because that's the only way to get the latest security patches. Why the big hurry all of a sudden? Changes in program behavior should be fully documented in advance of an upgrade. Users who prefer the behavior of the old version should be given the option to retain it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! The end user should not be forced to be the guinea pig whose feedback becomes the quality control for these programs. Please return to the former more careful release strategy. I worked as an electrical engineer for Motorola for many years. All too often, we had products being sold before they were designed and unrelenting pressure to push them out the door. There's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over was the cynical opinion of many of my colleagues. It seems like the software industry is the same way. Is it really rapid-release?? SeaMonkey 1.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.0.9 - twelve releases over twenty months. SeaMonkey 1.1 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.1.19 - twenty two releases over forty three months. SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 - twenty two releases over thirty months. Should the question really be *What's the difference??* There are a lot of differences, but the primary one is that the new release system includes NOT just bug and security fixes, but NEW FEATURES. There is also an ongoing User Interface redesign that is taking place slowly since FF4. I can't see that just how they choose to number releases affects any aspect of either use, or utility, of a release. Getting new features, and other 'non-bug/security' fixes to the user-base as quickly as possible means the FF can remain competitive in a rather difficult market. I, for one, think the new system is fantastic, and makes the product more useful, and more 'current'. What numbers are applied, I will let others discuss because it doesn't matter to me. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: A plea for a return to sanity in new version release scheduling
Ron Hunter wrote: On 8/29/2011 8:16 AM, Daniel wrote: John wrote: I use SeaMonkey most of the time and Firefox occasionally. I try never to use IE. The web browser and email client are critically important to me, and I think the majority of users would agree. Since Firefox and SeaMonkey embarked on their accelerated release schedule, we've seen several updates incorporating many significant behavioral changes which are causing grief to many users. Along with this we are being encouraged to upgrade promptly because that's the only way to get the latest security patches. Why the big hurry all of a sudden? Changes in program behavior should be fully documented in advance of an upgrade. Users who prefer the behavior of the old version should be given the option to retain it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! The end user should not be forced to be the guinea pig whose feedback becomes the quality control for these programs. Please return to the former more careful release strategy. I worked as an electrical engineer for Motorola for many years. All too often, we had products being sold before they were designed and unrelenting pressure to push them out the door. There's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over was the cynical opinion of many of my colleagues. It seems like the software industry is the same way. Is it really rapid-release?? SeaMonkey 1.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.0.9 - twelve releases over twenty months. SeaMonkey 1.1 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.1.19 - twenty two releases over forty three months. SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 - twenty two releases over thirty months. Should the question really be *What's the difference??* There are a lot of differences, but the primary one is that the new release system includes NOT just bug and security fixes, but NEW FEATURES. There is also an ongoing User Interface redesign that is taking place slowly since FF4. I can't see that just how they choose to number releases affects any aspect of either use, or utility, of a release. Getting new features, and other 'non-bug/security' fixes to the user-base as quickly as possible means the FF can remain competitive in a rather difficult market. I, for one, think the new system is fantastic, and makes the product more useful, and more 'current'. What numbers are applied, I will let others discuss because it doesn't matter to me. The point, which I apparently failed to make, is that SM updates have always happened fairly often, so I don't see what the problem with six weekly updates is?? -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Tab group behavior a little off?
Daniel wrote: Rickles wrote: Daniel wrote: Rickles wrote: OS is WinXP Pro SP3, patched/updated. Browser is: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110813 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3 Have been using SM for years (thanks, devs), only upgraded from v2.0.14 to 2.3 as a full-install-overwrite last night. Home page: defined as a group of 4 tabs, all with the BBC (news, currencies, 2 x weather). When browser opens, home group opens as normal. If Home Group is already open and the Home button clicked, the focused-tab is overwritten with the first of the replacement group tabs, and the remaining 3 are added to what's there, so you end up with 7 tabs (3 pairs of duplicates and one single). This repeats arithmetically each time you click Home. If I close all but 1 tab and click Home, I end up with just the Home group of tabs. It makes no difference whether any of the existing tabs actually are still on the sites they originally opened up to (go shopping at Amazon on one, Google maps on another, etc.) all but 1 existing tab stay the same. That one is overwritten and 3 more added. My preference is for tab groups is to 'Replace existing tabs'. I have toggled this setting to 'Add...', closed SM and started over, then changed the setting back to 'Replace...', then restarted SM again but still the same. Add-on Compat. Reporter 0.8.7 is installed. I have 2 add-ons relating to tabs: IE Tab Plus and SeaTab X. Both are as current a version as can be had; Reporter says IE Tab Plus isn't any good, but SeaTab X is OK. I've disabled both and restarted SM, still same behavior. Three other add-ons are reported by Compat. Reporter as no good with SM 2.3, but disabling them didn't change anything, either. Other than this one issue, so far 2.3 appears stable. Thoughts? I have a group of five tabs for my homepage and just tried clicking on the browser icon twice from the mail newsgroup screen. Only ended up with the one set of tabs. Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110820 SeaMonkey/2.3.1 The first time you clicked on the browser icon, it opened your browser home page group of tabs. If you don't close the browser window but don try the browser icon again, SM is smart enough not to open a new window, 'cause one's already open. What we're describing as faulty is what happens when you click on your browser's Home button when tabs are already open--if your preferences are set for the tab group to REPLACE what's already open, it still ADDS to what's open, instead. So if you have the Home group open and then click on Home again, you get duplicates. And the SMv 2.3.1 had no effect on this, it's the same since v2.1. But v2.0.14 doesn't do it. Sorry, poor explanation on my part! I was in SM Mail News, clicked the icon for SM browser, my five site Home group opened, without closing anything I switched back to Mail News and re-clicked the Browser icon.still just the five sites showing up. O.K., so this time I had Mail News open, clicked on the Browser icon in the bottom left, Five Sites Home Group opened in the browser. So this time I clicked on the Browser Icon in the bottom left of the Browser Screenand got a second Browser screen with my five tabs. In Edit-Preferences-Browser-Link Behavior, I've got Links from other applications set to A new tab in the current window. Again, the SM suite is working as it's supposed to, near as I can tell. Mine does the same thing, but your 'Links from other applications' doesn't apply to the SM browser, calling from inside itself. After all, there may be a very good reason for you to want to open a new SM browser window with it's own tabs, separate from anything you're doing in the first window. '...other applications...' refers to hyperlinks from, say, MS Word or Adobe Acrobat or some such. If you have a browser window open, and then click on a link from a Word doc, does that link open in it's own window, or does it open in a new tab in the extant browser window? That's what that preference means. And that behavior has nothing to do with the original message of this thread. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Forwarding graphics
flyguy wrote: I have the opposite problem: when I get an email with text and graphics, the graphics are not loaded (intentionally - I have remote images blocked); when I click on forward to forward the email, the images are loaded. I can work around it (if I remember in time) by going offline, clicking Forward, then sending the email. So, I'm wondering how you achieved what I want to do! Blocking the images is a personal setting on your computer. Forwarding the email doesn't forward the block. Their own email settings will dictate whether they see the images. -- Mike ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 2.2 to 2.3.1 Fer it or Again it?
hawker wrote: So I got 2.2, a huge disappointment with lots of annoying bugs in mail and one big one in web (RMB context menu bug). (...) So what are the big new 2.3.1 issues that were not in 2.2? The following page lists all fixes that 2.3.1 contains but 2.2 doesn't: http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.3/changes As you can see, the context menu issue is fixed as well as some MailNews issues like the one with Advanced Search. Should I be scared or should I update? The latter. :-) HTH Jens -- Jens Hatlak http://jens.hatlak.de/ SeaMonkey Trunk Tracker http://smtt.blogspot.com/ ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Forwarding graphics
Mike wrote: flyguy wrote: I have the opposite problem: when I get an email with text and graphics, the graphics are not loaded (intentionally - I have remote images blocked); when I click on forward to forward the email, the images are loaded. I can work around it (if I remember in time) by going offline, clicking Forward, then sending the email. So, I'm wondering how you achieved what I want to do! Blocking the images is a personal setting on your computer. Forwarding the email doesn't forward the block. Their own email settings will dictate whether they see the images. It sounded like flyguy was saying the forwarded message did not contain only the links, but the actual images, but that SM could be kept from doing this by going offline. If the forwarded message did contain images and not just links, how did it get them? -- War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left. -- Paul B. Gallagher ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Seamonkey 2.2 to 2.3.1 Fer it or Again it?
On 8/29/2011 10:15 AM hawker submitted the following: So I got 2.2, a huge disappointment with lots of annoying bugs in mail and one big one in web (RMB context menu bug). The new level of issues makes me scared to update, even though this is the most buggy version of since perhaps Moz 0.6. So what are the big new 2.3.1 issues that were not in 2.2? Should I be scared or should I update? I have never had an update before 2.2 that I questioned going back before. Absolutely - update -- Ed, W3BNR http://JonesFarm.us/W3BNR Powered by SeaMonkey: http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ What do you do when you discover an endangered animal that eats only endangered plants? ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: A plea for a return to sanity in new version release scheduling
Daniel wrote: Ron Hunter wrote: On 8/29/2011 8:16 AM, Daniel wrote: John wrote: I use SeaMonkey most of the time and Firefox occasionally. I try never to use IE. The web browser and email client are critically important to me, and I think the majority of users would agree. Since Firefox and SeaMonkey embarked on their accelerated release schedule, we've seen several updates incorporating many significant behavioral changes which are causing grief to many users. Along with this we are being encouraged to upgrade promptly because that's the only way to get the latest security patches. Why the big hurry all of a sudden? Changes in program behavior should be fully documented in advance of an upgrade. Users who prefer the behavior of the old version should be given the option to retain it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! The end user should not be forced to be the guinea pig whose feedback becomes the quality control for these programs. Please return to the former more careful release strategy. I worked as an electrical engineer for Motorola for many years. All too often, we had products being sold before they were designed and unrelenting pressure to push them out the door. There's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over was the cynical opinion of many of my colleagues. It seems like the software industry is the same way. Is it really rapid-release?? SeaMonkey 1.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.0.9 - twelve releases over twenty months. SeaMonkey 1.1 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.1.19 - twenty two releases over forty three months. SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 - twenty two releases over thirty months. Should the question really be *What's the difference??* There are a lot of differences, but the primary one is that the new release system includes NOT just bug and security fixes, but NEW FEATURES. There is also an ongoing User Interface redesign that is taking place slowly since FF4. I can't see that just how they choose to number releases affects any aspect of either use, or utility, of a release. Getting new features, and other 'non-bug/security' fixes to the user-base as quickly as possible means the FF can remain competitive in a rather difficult market. I, for one, think the new system is fantastic, and makes the product more useful, and more 'current'. What numbers are applied, I will let others discuss because it doesn't matter to me. The point, which I apparently failed to make, is that SM updates have always happened fairly often, so I don't see what the problem with six weekly updates is?? Daniel, There should not be any problem with the weekly updates as long as the first in the series contains fully documented changes to how important user tools and option perform. Example: When upgrading from SM 2.0 to 2.1 all user tools and options that have been improved from the previous version need to be fully documented within the application Help Files. Major security fixes need to be fully documented where those fixes may change the behavior over the older version. When making a minor version change (2.0.1 to 2.0.2) or (2.2.1 to 2.2.2) for security patches those changes must not change any user tools or operations. If a security patch is required that will affect user options then a new version level needs to be created with full documentation. Full documentation does not mean disclosing the code base in question, but dose mean how the changes will affect user experience with the new upgrade. Failure to perform these simple tasks will drive more users back to MS Internet Explorer and Outlook. Conclusion: The number of security patches is very important to keep our applications secure from the nasty world of Hackers and Crackers trying to infect our computers. At the same time the new and improved updates/upgrades must document the changes and how they may affect user experience. I don't mind having one, two, or three security upgrades a week if those upgrades do not affect how I use SM, and if they may affect my use of SM how do the changes affect how I use SM. Michael G ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Quicktime installer - associated helper application does not exist
I went to the addons page. I clicked on the line to check for updates. It sent me to a mozilla firefox page that shows my addons and which ones need to be updated. I click on the first one for Quicktime. It sends me to a Quicktime page. I click the download button, it starts to download. At the end I get that it failed and this message. C:\DOCUME~1\Marilyn\LOCALS~1\Temp\QuickTimeInstaller-4.exe could not be opened, because the associated helper application does not exist. Change the association in your preferences. This is not the only program that will not open. I also have a coupon printer that gets the same message, as well as adobe and many of the other addons. Someone explain to me what the associated helper application is and where do I find it. Marilyn ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Forwarding graphics
On 8/29/2011 9:49 AM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote: Mike wrote: flyguy wrote: I have the opposite problem: when I get an email with text and graphics, the graphics are not loaded (intentionally - I have remote images blocked); when I click on forward to forward the email, the images are loaded. I can work around it (if I remember in time) by going offline, clicking Forward, then sending the email. So, I'm wondering how you achieved what I want to do! Blocking the images is a personal setting on your computer. Forwarding the email doesn't forward the block. Their own email settings will dictate whether they see the images. It sounded like flyguy was saying the forwarded message did not contain only the links, but the actual images, but that SM could be kept from doing this by going offline. If the forwarded message did contain images and not just links, how did it get them? That is what I was saying, but I now have an update: when I click Forward (and I'm online), the images are loaded into the message. I don't want that to happen, in case there are web bugs or other image related irritants. When I send it, the images are NOT sent, and the message arrives at the recipients account the same as it did at mine (links, no images). So, at least I'm not causing the recipient any unexpected problems. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Quicktime installer - associated helper application does not exist
Marilyn G wrote: I went to the addons page. I clicked on the line to check for updates. It sent me to a mozilla firefox page that shows my addons and which ones need to be updated. I click on the first one for Quicktime. It sends me to a Quicktime page. I click the download button, it starts to download. At the end I get that it failed and this message. C:\DOCUME~1\Marilyn\LOCALS~1\Temp\QuickTimeInstaller-4.exe could not be opened, because the associated helper application does not exist. Change the association in your preferences. This is not the only program that will not open. I also have a coupon printer that gets the same message, as well as adobe and many of the other addons. Someone explain to me what the associated helper application is and where do I find it. Marilyn By any chance are you using a Mac? exe files are windows files. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.netmailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Email messages delete slow in 2.3
Daniel wrote: Paul B. Gallagher wrote: flyguy wrote: if you'd read his message... you'd know he already tried compact... Did he compact the Trash folder? I wasn't sure from his description if he'd done that. In every version of SeaMonkey I've ever had, telling the program to compact folders has resulted in compaction of all folders within the selected account, including Trash. But I suppose if he has it set up to direct deletions to Trash in a different account, compacting the source account would not affect that Trash folder. I see that you can now right-click a folder and tell the program to compact this folder, but that's new to me. I've always just done File | Compact Folders and gotten them all in one pass. I was astonished to read Justin's statement that compacting folders could take as long as an hour. In my experience, it's never taken more than about five minutes, and it usually takes less than two. And I'm not working with some ultrafast multi-CPU machine, but I do have folders with thousands of messages. It's my understanding that the process can be more effective if you File-Empty Trash before you Compact Folders. Went ahead and compacted all folders one at a time again. This is the 3rd time I did this. The first time I just did FileCompact folders. The second time I did them individually. (Right click, compact folder). The 3rd time I did them individually again. I do not know why compacting the folders the previous 2 times did not fix the problem. I am pretty sure the trash folder was the problem. Emails now delete properly. Thanks for all your suggestions because they were helpful in the event I missed something. Bernie ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: A plea for a return to sanity in new version release scheduling
Michael Gordon wrote: Daniel wrote: Ron Hunter wrote: On 8/29/2011 8:16 AM, Daniel wrote: John wrote: I use SeaMonkey most of the time and Firefox occasionally. I try never to use IE. The web browser and email client are critically important to me, and I think the majority of users would agree. Since Firefox and SeaMonkey embarked on their accelerated release schedule, we've seen several updates incorporating many significant behavioral changes which are causing grief to many users. Along with this we are being encouraged to upgrade promptly because that's the only way to get the latest security patches. Why the big hurry all of a sudden? Changes in program behavior should be fully documented in advance of an upgrade. Users who prefer the behavior of the old version should be given the option to retain it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! The end user should not be forced to be the guinea pig whose feedback becomes the quality control for these programs. Please return to the former more careful release strategy. I worked as an electrical engineer for Motorola for many years. All too often, we had products being sold before they were designed and unrelenting pressure to push them out the door. There's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over was the cynical opinion of many of my colleagues. It seems like the software industry is the same way. Is it really rapid-release?? SeaMonkey 1.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.0.9 - twelve releases over twenty months. SeaMonkey 1.1 alpha through to SeaMonkey 1.1.19 - twenty two releases over forty three months. SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha through to SeaMonkey to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 - twenty two releases over thirty months. Should the question really be *What's the difference??* There are a lot of differences, but the primary one is that the new release system includes NOT just bug and security fixes, but NEW FEATURES. There is also an ongoing User Interface redesign that is taking place slowly since FF4. I can't see that just how they choose to number releases affects any aspect of either use, or utility, of a release. Getting new features, and other 'non-bug/security' fixes to the user-base as quickly as possible means the FF can remain competitive in a rather difficult market. I, for one, think the new system is fantastic, and makes the product more useful, and more 'current'. What numbers are applied, I will let others discuss because it doesn't matter to me. The point, which I apparently failed to make, is that SM updates have always happened fairly often, so I don't see what the problem with six weekly updates is?? Daniel, There should not be any problem with the weekly updates as long as the first in the series contains fully documented changes to how important user tools and option perform. Example: When upgrading from SM 2.0 to 2.1 all user tools and options that have been improved from the previous version need to be fully documented within the application Help Files. Major security fixes need to be fully documented where those fixes may change the behavior over the older version. When making a minor version change (2.0.1 to 2.0.2) or (2.2.1 to 2.2.2) for security patches those changes must not change any user tools or operations. If a security patch is required that will affect user options then a new version level needs to be created with full documentation. Full documentation does not mean disclosing the code base in question, but dose mean how the changes will affect user experience with the new upgrade. Failure to perform these simple tasks will drive more users back to MS Internet Explorer and Outlook. Conclusion: The number of security patches is very important to keep our applications secure from the nasty world of Hackers and Crackers trying to infect our computers. At the same time the new and improved updates/upgrades must document the changes and how they may affect user experience. I don't mind having one, two, or three security upgrades a week if those upgrades do not affect how I use SM, and if they may affect my use of SM how do the changes affect how I use SM. Michael G Michael, back a bit I reported that I was having a problem so, after upgrading, when I clicked on the Browser Icon (I normally just start in Mail News), I was being taken to a SeaMonkey-Project page which advised of the problems/improvements made in the upgrade rather than my Home Group. This was a desired situation (by the developers) which, I think, could be switched off in prefs.js Has this function been changed?? -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Tab group behavior a little off?
Rickles wrote: Daniel wrote: Rickles wrote: Daniel wrote: Rickles wrote: OS is WinXP Pro SP3, patched/updated. Browser is: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110813 Firefox/6.0 SeaMonkey/2.3 Have been using SM for years (thanks, devs), only upgraded from v2.0.14 to 2.3 as a full-install-overwrite last night. Home page: defined as a group of 4 tabs, all with the BBC (news, currencies, 2 x weather). When browser opens, home group opens as normal. If Home Group is already open and the Home button clicked, the focused-tab is overwritten with the first of the replacement group tabs, and the remaining 3 are added to what's there, so you end up with 7 tabs (3 pairs of duplicates and one single). This repeats arithmetically each time you click Home. If I close all but 1 tab and click Home, I end up with just the Home group of tabs. It makes no difference whether any of the existing tabs actually are still on the sites they originally opened up to (go shopping at Amazon on one, Google maps on another, etc.) all but 1 existing tab stay the same. That one is overwritten and 3 more added. My preference is for tab groups is to 'Replace existing tabs'. I have toggled this setting to 'Add...', closed SM and started over, then changed the setting back to 'Replace...', then restarted SM again but still the same. Add-on Compat. Reporter 0.8.7 is installed. I have 2 add-ons relating to tabs: IE Tab Plus and SeaTab X. Both are as current a version as can be had; Reporter says IE Tab Plus isn't any good, but SeaTab X is OK. I've disabled both and restarted SM, still same behavior. Three other add-ons are reported by Compat. Reporter as no good with SM 2.3, but disabling them didn't change anything, either. Other than this one issue, so far 2.3 appears stable. Thoughts? I have a group of five tabs for my homepage and just tried clicking on the browser icon twice from the mail newsgroup screen. Only ended up with the one set of tabs. Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110820 SeaMonkey/2.3.1 The first time you clicked on the browser icon, it opened your browser home page group of tabs. If you don't close the browser window but don try the browser icon again, SM is smart enough not to open a new window, 'cause one's already open. What we're describing as faulty is what happens when you click on your browser's Home button when tabs are already open--if your preferences are set for the tab group to REPLACE what's already open, it still ADDS to what's open, instead. So if you have the Home group open and then click on Home again, you get duplicates. And the SMv 2.3.1 had no effect on this, it's the same since v2.1. But v2.0.14 doesn't do it. Sorry, poor explanation on my part! I was in SM Mail News, clicked the icon for SM browser, my five site Home group opened, without closing anything I switched back to Mail News and re-clicked the Browser icon.still just the five sites showing up. O.K., so this time I had Mail News open, clicked on the Browser icon in the bottom left, Five Sites Home Group opened in the browser. So this time I clicked on the Browser Icon in the bottom left of the Browser Screenand got a second Browser screen with my five tabs. In Edit-Preferences-Browser-Link Behavior, I've got Links from other applications set to A new tab in the current window. Again, the SM suite is working as it's supposed to, near as I can tell. Mine does the same thing, but your 'Links from other applications' doesn't apply to the SM browser, calling from inside itself. After all, there may be a very good reason for you to want to open a new SM browser window with it's own tabs, separate from anything you're doing in the first window. '...other applications...' refers to hyperlinks from, say, MS Word or Adobe Acrobat or some such. If you have a browser window open, and then click on a link from a Word doc, does that link open in it's own window, or does it open in a new tab in the extant browser window? That's what that preference means. And that behavior has nothing to do with the original message of this thread. Rickles, you're right that this (other applications) is how it should work, even if I click on a link in a email or news post, it should open in a new tab, not a new browser. I was just letting the OP know how I was set up. -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: A plea for a return to sanity in new version release scheduling
The next version of Firefox (version 7.0) is scheduled for 27th September 2011. Please make a note in your diary! Good luck. John wrote: I use SeaMonkey most of the time and Firefox occasionally. I try never to use IE. snipped ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Quicktime installer - associated helper application does not exist
On 8/29/11 7:04 PM, PhillipJones wrote: Marilyn G wrote: I went to the addons page. I clicked on the line to check for updates. It sent me to a mozilla firefox page that shows my addons and which ones need to be updated. I click on the first one for Quicktime. It sends me to a Quicktime page. I click the download button, it starts to download. At the end I get that it failed and this message. C:\DOCUME~1\Marilyn\LOCALS~1\Temp\QuickTimeInstaller-4.exe could not be opened, because the associated helper application does not exist. Change the association in your preferences. This is not the only program that will not open. I also have a coupon printer that gets the same message, as well as adobe and many of the other addons. Someone explain to me what the associated helper application is and where do I find it. Marilyn By any chance are you using a Mac? exe files are windows files. The source of the original message indicates that Marilyn G is using SeaMonkey 2.3.1 for Windows XP. -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com/ On occasion, I might filter and ignore all newsgroup messages posted through GoogleGroups via Google's G2/1.0 user agent because of spam from that source. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
