Mozilla 0.9.9
When I create a mail and send through my mail account,
everything works correctly.
when I create a mail and send to a newsgroup, I get the
message that it is unable to store the message in my SENT
items folder. If I try to save it as draft, I get the same
message about the
For some reason I am unable to retrive newsgroup listing using Mozilla.
When I attempt to download it, I either get a quick done, or please wait
message.
Please advice.
>>
>>>
>>> sgroup Netscape asks me to enter a password for the
>>> newsgroup and a
>>>
>>>> password. Even though I tick the box asking Password
>>>> Manager to remember the values I enter, I am still nagged
>>>> every time. An
>>
>>>No doubt I have misunderstood something, but every time I
>>>try to access a new
>>>
>>
>>sgroup Netscape asks me to enter a password for the
>>newsgroup and a
>>
>>>password. Even though I tick the box asking Passwor
ape asks me to enter a password for the
> newsgroup and a
>> password. Even though I tick the box asking Password
>> Manager to remember the values I enter, I am still nagged
>> every time. And no matter I enter, I always end up with an
>> 'Authentication Error'
o remember
> the values I enter, I am still nagged every time. And no matter I enter,
> I always end up with an 'Authentication Error'.
> On some newsgroups I now find I cannot read the text of any messages. I
> have tried uninstalling Netscape 6.2 and reinstalling it but it
am still nagged every time. And no matter I enter,
I always end up with an 'Authentication Error'.
On some newsgroups I now find I cannot read the text of any messages. I
have tried uninstalling Netscape 6.2 and reinstalling it but it does not
seem to make any difference.
Can someo
grayrest wrote:
> RTH wrote:
>
>> I apologize if this has already been brought up...
>> There is no button or tab to let me search for certain newsgroups:(
>> There are 4 "half-boxes" at the bottom right of the subscribe window.
>> There is no text on
RTH wrote:
> I apologize if this has already been brought up...
> There is no button or tab to let me search for certain newsgroups:(
> There are 4 "half-boxes" at the bottom right of the subscribe window.
> There is no text on any of them but I am able to click them (not
I apologize if this has already been brought up...
There is no button or tab to let me search for certain newsgroups:(
There are 4 "half-boxes" at the bottom right of the subscribe window.
There is no text on any of them but I am able to click them (nothing
happens though). Anyone e
Ben Ruppel (slate) wrote:
> Hi, I've set up my filters to automatically label messages I've sent so
> that they stand out, but the filter doesn't seem to apply in newsgroups.
Newsgroup do not support filters yet.
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to
Hi, I've set up my filters to automatically label messages I've sent so
that they stand out, but the filter doesn't seem to apply in newsgroups.
Can anyone else get this to work? I'm using the January 8th win32
nightly.
Greetings !
How do I cause all subscribed newsgroups to auto download all msgs when
I initially click on my newsgroup server on the sidebar, as netscape did.
I am running Mozilla-0.96 under Debian-2.4.6.
I'd also like to print messages using larger fonts from Mozilla.
Additionally
I Cannot post to news.mozdev.org newsgroups - WHY?
I want to post a warning about BrowserG in p.m.browserg. Do I need a
password or special permission?
--
Regards,
Peter Lairo
When I choose File->Offline->Work Offline Mozilla allways disconnect
without downloading the new messages in selected newsgroups.
When I choose File->Offline->Download/Sync now Mozilla starts after a
long time of inactivity (>30 seconds) to download new messages in the
first n
Pratik wrote:
> Parish wrote:
>
>> When MEssenger is opened it scans all my newsgroups (on 3 servers) for
>> new messages but I can't find a way to make it do that on demand. Is
>> it possible? If so, how?
>>
>
> One way to do it would be t
The "Get Msg" button?
-WD
Parish wrote:
> When MEssenger is opened it scans all my newsgroups (on 3 servers) for
> new messages but I can't find a way to make it do that on demand. Is it
> possible? If so, how?
>
> Regards,
>
> Parish.
>
Parish wrote:
> When MEssenger is opened it scans all my newsgroups (on 3 servers) for
> new messages but I can't find a way to make it do that on demand. Is it
> possible? If so, how?
>
One way to do it would be to collapse the server and expand it again.
Mozilla will
When MEssenger is opened it scans all my newsgroups (on 3 servers) for
new messages but I can't find a way to make it do that on demand. Is it
possible? If so, how?
Regards,
Parish.
thanks Jacek!
Cheers
John
Jacek Piskozub wrote:
> jv wrote:
>
>> I got ver 0.9.2 (on W2K) and cannot locate the input field you are
>> talking about...
>
>
>
> It's not in 0.9.2. You have to doewnload a recent nightly build or wait
> for 0.9.3.
>
> Jacek
>
jv wrote:
> I got ver 0.9.2 (on W2K) and cannot locate the input field you are
> talking about...
It's not in 0.9.2. You have to doewnload a recent nightly build or wait
for 0.9.3.
Jacek
ad to hunt all over the
>>>>> place to find this ng - Shsh!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Done.
>>>> http://groups.google.com/groups?group=netscape.public.mozilla
>>>> Click on the "Search only in netscape.public.mozilla.*"
>>>
n the "Search only in netscape.public.mozilla.*"
>>toggle
>>
>
> I think what they are looking for is a way to search for
> newsgroups in the 'SUBSCRIPTION' function.
>
>
Hong Kong wrote:
> [Image]
okay, but what I mean is: how can I mark multiple newsgroup-folders in the mail-folder
view, comparable with marking files in explorer (shift, or ctrl)?
After that I want to click new msg and then all marked folder should be in the
recipient-box.
bye
Hi,
is there no support for crossposting integrated?
bye
illa
>>> Click on the "Search only in netscape.public.mozilla.*"
>>> toggle
>>
>>
>> I think what they are looking for is a way to search for newsgroups in
>> the 'SUBSCRIPTION' function.
>
>
> it's fixed since a few day
pe has. Had to hunt all over the
>>>place to find this ng - Shsh!
>>>
>>>
>>Done.
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?group=netscape.public.mozilla
>>Click on the "Search only in netscape.public.mozilla.*"
>>toggle
>>
>
> I
ng - Shsh!
>>
>
> Done.
> http://groups.google.com/groups?group=netscape.public.mozilla
> Click on the "Search only in netscape.public.mozilla.*"
> toggle
I think what they are looking for is a way to search for
newsgroups in the 'SUBSCRIPTION' function.
jv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Pleeease Mozilla: add a search engine to the newsgroup account -
> just like Netscape has. Had to hunt all over the place to find this ng -
> Shsh!
>
Done. http://groups.google.com/groups?group=netscape.public.mozil
Pleeease Mozilla: add a search engine to the newsgroup account -
just like Netscape has. Had to hunt all over the place to find this ng -
Shsh!
Cheers
John
Asa Dotzler wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Actually Mozilla is very close. A couple of hackers have developed a
> Mozilla add-on called forumzilla which gives the user a mail-news
> interface for reading weblogs like mozillazine, kuro5hin, slashdot, etc.
Sah-weet! So who want to run the pool for guessi
Asa Dotzler wrote:
> DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>
>> *gasp* You are going to say that Mozilla can't access a web based
>> news service through the news client??? Oh my god, how has this
>> feature been left out. I mean, IE has had this for, what, 5, 10 years
>> now? Oh? IE doesn't have this featur
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Marcin Januchta wrote:
>
>>You may find this question silly, but what/who is RMS and GPL?
>>
>
> Not a silly question at all.
>
> RMS is Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software Foundation (FSF)
> and the GNU (which stands for "GNU's Not Unix
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Marcin Januchta wrote:
>
>>You may find this question silly, but what/who is RMS and GPL?
>>
>
> Not a silly question at all.
>
> RMS is Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software Foundation (FSF)
> and the GNU (which stands for "GNU's Not Unix
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Marcin Januchta wrote:
>
>>You may find this question silly, but what/who is RMS and GPL?
>>
>
> Not a silly question at all.
>
> RMS is Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software Foundation (FSF)
> and the GNU (which stands for "GNU's Not Unix
DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>
>
> JTK wrote:
>
>> This better? I have to apologize, I am not nearly nerdly enough to
>> have known
>> that you needed a space after the two minuses. And I'm using a web-based
>> newsgroup "reader", which Maozilla won't interface to to do such
>> wonderful
>> things fo
Ian Hickson wrote:
> Only a few minor parts of the DOM
> actually involve UI. The window.alert() method would be one such example.
> It needs to be implemented by the embedding application (KM, for instance)
> if JavaScript alerts are to work correctly.
Then I stand corrected. Thank you very much
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, jesus X wrote:
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> (Where Gecko is the rendering engine (HTML, CSS, DOM, etc) and Mozilla
>> is the web browser.)
>
> Is not the DOM, while part of Gecko, partially connected to the UI as
> well?
No more so than HTTP or CSS.
> IIRC, for interfacing wit
"John Dobbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
> > >
> > > God, why do I bother.
> >
> > A very good question. Many of us would rather you did not.
> >
>
> As long as you reply to
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Marcin Januchta wrote:
>
> You may find this question silly, but what/who is RMS and GPL?
Not a silly question at all.
RMS is Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software Foundation (FSF)
and the GNU (which stands for "GNU's Not Unix") project. For some obscure
reason,
Ian Hickson wrote:
> (Where Gecko is the
> rendering engine (HTML, CSS, DOM, etc) and Mozilla is the web browser.)
Is not the DOM, while part of Gecko, partially connected to the UI as well?
IIRC, for interfacing with users, the DOM has to go through the UI's set of
controls, correct? Or am I add
JTK wrote:
> Wh...?!?!? Do you know what an MBA even *is*? It has nothing
> whatsoever to do with software.
I know. Neither does a Minor is business whatever (you didn't specify what
exactly your minor was). My point was to illustrate that your minor in business
had no bearing on your technical
JTK wrote:
>
>>
>
> Jesus was a rabbi, what's your beef? You know what the word means,
> don't you? I mean you've taken all those Hebrew classes in addition to
> the econ classes, right?
>
>
>>I am
>>neither Jewish, nor a rabbi, and frankly, it's childish. The joke was old after
>>the first
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
>>> I long ago proved that XUL was a major factor in Mozilla's slowness. Well
>>> actually K-Meleon did. And from the few non-private posts that leak into
>>> performance, it sounds like I'm not the only one who knows it.
>>
>> K-M does not use everything in Mozil
JTK wrote:
>
> > Because the statement is neither correct, nor proven to be so.
> >
>
> It is correct, I proved it, and caught nothing but flack for my
> yet-to-be-disproven numbers. In fact recently someone else has posted
> similar results, in a pretty embarrasing attempt to *disprove* them!
jesus X wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
> > > But even an MBA can know nothing about software programming.
> > *Even* an MBA? Whoah, now *that's* crazy-talk!
>
> YEs, even an MBA as opposed to your minor. I would wager that someone with an
> MBA has put in more time and effort to learn more about the sub
jesus X wrote:
> K-M does not use everything in Mozilla except the UI. It's just the renderer in
> another app. This does not constitute proof. That's the equivalent of running
> Quake 3 on a Pentium with a double speed CD drive, then running it on an Athlon
> 4 with a 36x drive, and claiming the
Carlfish wrote:
> IYHO.
Yes. Unlike JTK, I do not pretend to have the absolute Right Opinion on
everything. Feel free to disagree at any time. :)
--
jesus X [ Booze-fueled paragon of pointless cruelty and wanton sadism. ]
email [ jesusx @ who.net ]
web [ http://burntelectrons.com ] [ Up
RV wrote:
> The concept of variable and fixed cost must be defined in terms of periods of
> time (short run or long run) you are considering. Software is an abstraction
> for a product and as such can be considered intangible. But in order to
> deliver a product tangible (raw materials, equipment
JTK wrote:
> > But even an MBA can know nothing about software programming.
> *Even* an MBA? Whoah, now *that's* crazy-talk!
YEs, even an MBA as opposed to your minor. I would wager that someone with an
MBA has put in more time and effort to learn more about the subject than someone
with a minor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Dobbins wrote:
> Richard M Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation and author of
> the GPL.
...the organisation which produces GNU Emacs, gcc, et al.
- --
Cheers, Chris Howells -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web (& for PGP Key): http://chrisho
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 16:04:51 -0400, jesus X <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
somehow managed to type:
>Like I said, I don't think everything needs to be that way. I know how hard it
>is to program good apps, and the skill it requires. If there was no way for a
>programmer to be reimbursed for his effort
mvOW6.11208$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
So you mean I just sit down and type:Ok computer, I want a W3C complient web browser, and all the source for it, hit enter and then suddenly a couple hundred million lines of code pop up and I get a web browser? No, not quite. It takes a very, very long time t
Alex wrote:
> Marcin Januchta wrote:
>
> > You may find this question silly, but what/who is RMS and GPL?
> >
>
>
> GPL is the GNU General Public License, which is one of several licenses
> approved by the Open Source Initiative that open source projects can use
> when releasing their source cod
JTK wrote:
>>Comments to Mozilla's 'bloat',
>>
>
> So you are going to tell me Mozilla is *not* a complete pig?
>
> BAHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!
>
> But can you get a witness? I said can you get a witness brother!
Ok, let's talk about this one. How many DLLs does IE require?
Marcin Januchta wrote:
> You may find this question silly, but what/who is RMS and GPL?
>
GPL is the GNU General Public License, which is one of several licenses
approved by the Open Source Initiative that open source projects can use
when releasing their source code to the public. An open
You may find this question silly, but what/who is RMS and GPL?
jesus X wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>>Since you clearly understand the issues, I would recommend being more
>>careful when making statements like "RMS [sees] selling software as a
>>sin", which is not true at all (he encourages it
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
>
> I long ago proved that XUL was a major factor in Mozilla's slowness.
Just for the record, this is in fact a myth. I refer interested parties to
recent posts in n.p.mozilla.performance for more details.
--
Ian Hickson )\
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, jesus X says...
>
>JTK wrote:
>> So you also do not know what fixed and variable costs are.
>
>No, I understand it perfectly.
No, you don't...
> There is nothing more variable than intangible
>assets.
>
..as you've just proved yet again.
>> > You've done no such
Ian Hickson wrote:
> Actually, in my experience he very rarely replies to my posts. In fact he
> rarely replies to any post pointing out his limitations. The truth is
> clearly too painful for him to face it directly. I feel sorry for him.
I've noticed the same tendency. Give him an incontroverti
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, jesus X wrote:
>>
>> Yes, of course. I couldn't care less, personally. My belief is that
>> software should be free (as in free will), for reasons described quite
>> well by RMS in his papers. If this means it is not possible to make a
>> profit from software development, then
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, John Dobbins wrote:
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
>>>
>>> God, why do I bother.
>>
>> A very good question. Many of us would rather you did not.
>>
>
> As long as you reply to his posts, he'll bother.
Actually, in my experience he very rarely rep
Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
> >
> > God, why do I bother.
>
> A very good question. Many of us would rather you did not.
>
As long as you reply to his posts, he'll bother.
Don't feed the trolls.
JBD
JTK wrote:
> So you also do not know what fixed and variable costs are.
No, I understand it perfectly. There is nothing more variable than intangible
assets.
> > You've done no such research to attempt to help your case in these
> > arguments.
> Um, I think a minor in business counts as "researc
Ian Hickson wrote:
> Since you clearly understand the issues, I would recommend being more
> careful when making statements like "RMS [sees] selling software as a
> sin", which is not true at all (he encourages it), and "[GPL] software
> itself must be 100% cost free", which again is patently untr
DeMoN_LaG wrote:
> JTK wrote:
>
This better? I have to apologize, I am not nearly nerdly enough to
have known
that you needed a space after the two minuses. And I'm using a
web-based
newsgroup "reader", which Maozilla won't interface to to do such
wonderful
>>>
JTK wrote:
>>>This better? I have to apologize, I am not nearly nerdly enough to have known
>>>that you needed a space after the two minuses. And I'm using a web-based
>>>newsgroup "reader", which Maozilla won't interface to to do such wonderful
>>>things for me.
>>>
>>*gasp* You are going to
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
>
>JTK wrote:
[snip]
>> Good, we're finally getting somewhere.
>
>Not really. I still find you annoying,
Yeah, I still got it.
> you still have no idea what you
>are arguing about.
>
No, you still have no idea what I am arguing about.
[snip
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, jesus X says...
>
>JTK wrote:
>> I said nothing of the sort. I said software has no variable cost.
>
>Which is equally untrue. Software not only has varying cost to create and sell,
>it can fluctuate far more than a lot of other industries.
>
So you also do not kno
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, jesus X wrote:
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> I'm confused by your argument.
>
> Once you "sell a copy" (define it how you will), that person can then
> make unlimited exactly copies and distribute them infinitely, thus
> rendering your attempt to sell the software moot. Aside from
JTK wrote:
> I said nothing of the sort. I said software has no variable cost.
Which is equally untrue. Software not only has varying cost to create and sell,
it can fluctuate far more than a lot of other industries.
> I also
> said you're way out of your league here, and need to take an economi
Ian Hickson wrote:
> I'm confused by your argument.
Once you "sell a copy" (define it how you will), that person can then make
unlimited exactly copies and distribute them infinitely, thus rendering your
attempt to sell the software moot. Aside from custom written software for a
single client or
JTK wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
>
Red Hat makes money off selling Linux CDs and Linux books, as well as
providing tech support. You can go to their web site and download Linux
for free. The only catch is you get no manuals, and they won't provide
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, jesus X wrote:
>
> Karl Ove Hufthammer wrote:
>> No, it's not. You can sell GPLed software. See > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html >:
>
> If you read it further, you see there is a difference between charging for the
> software, and charging for the distribution.
Co
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
>
> God, why do I bother.
A very good question. Many of us would rather you did not.
--
Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA /. `- ' ( `--'
+1 650 937 6593
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
>
> I'd bitch if I was you.
We noticed.
--
Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA /. `- ' ( `--'
+1 650 937 6593`- , ) - > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hix
DeMoN_LaG wrote:
> Is this true? Last time anyone tried to get access to AOL's IM network they
> blocked the client out.
GAIM connects to AIM, and I think Jabber does too. AOL blocked Yahoo and MSN's
messenger programs.
Of course, them blocking you is unrelated to you writing and distributing a
Karl Ove Hufthammer wrote:
> No, it's not. You can sell GPLed software. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html >:
If you read it further, you see there is a difference between charging for the
software, and charging for the distribution.
--
jesus X [ Booze-fueled paragon of pointless c
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
>
>>>Red Hat makes money off selling Linux CDs and Linux books, as well as
>>>providing tech support. You can go to their web site and download Linux
>>>for free. The only catch is you get no manuals, and they won't provide
>>>tech support. H
jesus X wrote:
> JTK wrote:
>
>>Really? So I could take Maozilla, bundle it with my own Instant Messaging
>>utility (supporting both AOL's proprietary IM and non-proprietary,
>>standards-based ones), rework the email reader to read not only regular pop3
>>and imap email, but also AOL email, and
>>Red Hat makes money off selling Linux CDs and Linux books, as well as
>>providing tech support. You can go to their web site and download Linux
>>for free. The only catch is you get no manuals, and they won't provide
>>tech support. HAHAHA, why am I telling you this? You are the know all
JTK wrote:
> Red Hat somehow has stayed in business for quite a while, though you
> claim they don't turn a profit.
They are running at a loss. That's an undisputable fact.
--
Cheers, Chris Howells -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web (& for PGP Key): http://chrishowells.co.uk
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, jesus X wrote:
>
> You cannot sell the software itself. You can sell software that runs with/on
> GPLed software, but the software itself must be 100% cost free and restriction
> free. That's the nature of the GPL.
That is absolutely not true.
# Redistributing free software
jesus X <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> You cannot sell the software itself. You can sell software
> that runs with/on GPLed software, but the software itself must
> be 100% cost free and restriction free. That's the nature of
> the GPL.
No, it's not.
JTK wrote:
> Really? So I could take Maozilla, bundle it with my own Instant Messaging
> utility (supporting both AOL's proprietary IM and non-proprietary,
> standards-based ones), rework the email reader to read not only regular pop3
> and imap email, but also AOL email, and, oh, say MSN email,
JTK wrote:
> Please explain how you're not able to make money from GPLed software.
You cannot sell the software itself. You can sell software that runs with/on
GPLed software, but the software itself must be 100% cost free and restriction
free. That's the nature of the GPL.
> Red Hat somehow has
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
>
> Really? So I could take Maozilla, bundle it with my own Instant Messaging
> utility (supporting both AOL's proprietary IM and non-proprietary,
> standards-based ones), rework the email reader to read not only regular pop3 and
> imap email, but also AOL email, a
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, DeMoN_LaG says...
>
>JTK wrote:
>
>> jesus X wrote:
>>
>>>Garth Wallace wrote:
>>>
MPL is more restrictive than the BSD license but not so much as the GPL,
AFAICT.
>>>To me, I consider the MPL more open than the GPL license, similar to the BSDL.
>>>Why
JTK wrote:
> jesus X wrote:
>
>>Garth Wallace wrote:
>>
>>>MPL is more restrictive than the BSD license but not so much as the GPL,
>>>AFAICT.
>>>
>>To me, I consider the MPL more open than the GPL license, similar to the BSDL.
>>Why? Despite Roblimo's article in Open Magazine, the GPL is somewh
jesus X wrote:
> Garth Wallace wrote:
>
>>MPL is more restrictive than the BSD license but not so much as the GPL,
>>AFAICT.
>
> To me, I consider the MPL more open than the GPL license, similar to the BSDL.
Well, I consider them to be equally "open", since you can look at the
whole source u
jesus X wrote:
>
> Garth Wallace wrote:
> > MPL is more restrictive than the BSD license but not so much as the GPL,
> > AFAICT.
>
> To me, I consider the MPL more open than the GPL license, similar to the BSDL.
> Why? Despite Roblimo's article in Open Magazine, the GPL is somewhat contagious.
>
Garth Wallace wrote:
> MPL is more restrictive than the BSD license but not so much as the GPL,
> AFAICT.
To me, I consider the MPL more open than the GPL license, similar to the BSDL.
Why? Despite Roblimo's article in Open Magazine, the GPL is somewhat contagious.
Mainly in the aspect of never b
Stuart Ballard wrote:
> Garth Wallace wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
>>>I think it was Gerv or Garth telling me that. I'll see if'n I can find
>>>one of the many quotes.
>>>
>>I'd certainly like to see if you can back that assertion up...
>
> I suspect what was actually said was "Netscape Communicat
jesus X wrote:
>
> Umm, the MPL is just as open as the GPL, but less restrictive to those who wish
> to actually try and profit from their hard work. But I seem to recall that it
> was going to be dual-licensed under the MPL and GPL, but can't seem to see that
> at a quick glance.
MPL is more r
Garth Wallace wrote:
> JTK wrote:
> > I think it was Gerv or Garth telling me that. I'll see if'n I can find
> > one of the many quotes.
> I'd certainly like to see if you can back that assertion up...
If he does, you'll have to not take my calling you a pinhead personally. Since I
doubt you sai
JTK wrote:
> Indeed, which makes it all the more distasteful when those in-the-know
> try to misinform people that AOL/Time Warner/Netscape is somehow not in
> complete control of this project. Well, as far as the project is under
> complete control *COUGH*almostfouryearsnow*HACK*.
Your number k
Garth Wallace wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
>
> > I think it was Gerv or Garth telling me that. I'll see if'n I can find
> > one of the many quotes.
>
> I'd certainly like to see if you can back that assertion up...
I suspect what was actually said was "Netscape Communicator" or
"Netscape 4.x" is tot
JTK wrote:
> jesus X wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
>>>So what's the ETA on getting the "netscape." out of the names of these
>>>groups, seeing as everyone keeps telling me that Netscape and Mozilla
>>>are entirely unrelated?
>>>
>>Whoever said they're TOTALLY unrelated is a pinhead, much like yoursel
jesus X wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
> > > Whoever said they're TOTALLY unrelated is a pinhead, much like yourself.
> > I think it was Gerv or Garth telling me that. I'll see if'n I can find
> > one of the many quotes.
>
> Then when Gerv or Garth said that, they were being a pinhead. Netscape founded
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
