WLS sent me the following::
sean nathan bean wrote:
my update has been spinning for a couple of hours now...
sean
Originally installed manually or from a software management update?
My SM 2.1 was installed from the mozilla repository, but openSUSE forgot
to take out the Check for Updates me
Hello,
I *just* pushed (to the beta channel) 2.0.14->2.2 Major Update Offers.
I would appreciate help testing these from anyone who feels up to it.
Current Known Issues:
* Only en-US billboard is up, will be asking l10n teams to localize for
me soon. (unsure at this time if we will offer updat
Cruz, Jaime wrote:
>The add-on authors seem to be having difficulties
>keeping up with the upgrade cycle,
>
Asa Dotzler (who is not authorized to speak for Mozilla)
made a comment that caused even more corps to dump Firefox.
(Having to test for breakage before deploying
then test AGAIN soon afterwa
On 7/8/2011 11:42 AM, Graham P Davis wrote:
I thought I'd have another try with Seamonkey 2.1 but ran into a couple
of problems.
(1) I thought I saw SM say it was importing FF5 bookmarks but must have
been mistaken. I know other browsers can't manage that trick but would
have thought another Moz
Cruz, Jaime wrote:
Cecil Bankston wrote:
Cruz, Jaime wrote:
The add-on authors seem to be having difficulties keeping up with the
upgrade cycle, and several add-ons I count on aren't yet compatible with
2.2 (they just BARELY got compatibility with 2.1). This really is a
STUPID decision on the p
Interviewed by CNN on 08/07/2011 12:49, Rex told the world:
> Firefox went from version 4 to version 5 in less than 2 months - in
> imitation of Google Chrome, who seem to be incrementing the version
> every other week.
> Please tell me Seamonkey isn't going to do the same thing so that by the
>
Just to mention, that for me 2 SM2.2 (auto-)updates (Windows Vista and
Mac OS 10.6.8) went fine the last day, based on SM2.1 installations.
I'm actually still maintaining mail folders (well, "keeping them in
direct access archive mode" would be more precise) with mails from 1997
without having
Cecil Bankston wrote:
Cruz, Jaime wrote:
The add-on authors seem to be having difficulties keeping up with the
upgrade cycle, and several add-ons I count on aren't yet compatible with
2.2 (they just BARELY got compatibility with 2.1). This really is a
STUPID decision on the part of the Mozilla o
Robert Kaiser wrote:
JeffM schrieb:
...then there is Google included an actual API for extensions
in their Chrome Browser.
There's an "Add-On SDK" for Mozilla software that does the same. Still,
add-ons built with that only or the Google Chrome API can do so much
less than full-blown add-ons f
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Daniel schrieb:
Hey, KaiRo, when you talk here about machines for further SM 2.0.x
updates, and elsewhere about machines for 64bit Linux builds, are these
machines under the full time control of the SeaMonkey Council, or are
they Mozilla owned machines that the SM council ge
Cruz, Jaime wrote:
The add-on authors seem to be having difficulties keeping up with the
upgrade cycle, and several add-ons I count on aren't yet compatible with
2.2 (they just BARELY got compatibility with 2.1). This really is a
STUPID decision on the part of the Mozilla organization.
And now I
Cruz, Jaime wrote:
The add-on authors seem to be having difficulties keeping up with the
upgrade cycle, and several add-ons I count on aren't yet compatible with
2.2 (they just BARELY got compatibility with 2.1). This really is a
STUPID decision on the part of the Mozilla organization.
And now I
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 15:23:01 -0400, Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote:
> Graham P Davis wrote:
>> I thought I'd have another try with Seamonkey 2.1 but ran into a couple
>> of problems.
>>
>> (1) I thought I saw SM say it was importing FF5 bookmarks but must have
>> been mistaken. I know other browsers can
The add-on authors seem to be having difficulties keeping up with the
upgrade cycle, and several add-ons I count on aren't yet compatible with
2.2 (they just BARELY got compatibility with 2.1). This really is a
STUPID decision on the part of the Mozilla organization.
And now I've got this dam
Rex wrote:
Firefox went from version 4 to version 5 in less than 2 months - in
imitation of Google Chrome, who seem to be incrementing the version
every other week.
Please tell me Seamonkey isn't going to do the same thing so that by the
end of the year we're up to version 3.5 or 4, and 5 by next
On 11-07-07 5:12 PM, goldtech wrote:
Please explain why it's necessary for addons to break when ever a new
version of FF or SM comes out. Can not it be coded so that all the
tools I use will continue to work? I don't get it - would someone
explain?
Someone asked a similar question in the Thunde
Graham P Davis wrote:
I thought I'd have another try with Seamonkey 2.1 but ran into a couple
of problems.
(1) I thought I saw SM say it was importing FF5 bookmarks but must have
been mistaken. I know other browsers can't manage that trick but would
have thought another Mozilla product would hav
Daniel schrieb:
Callek, pull your finger out!! ;-)
I think getting "Major Updates" out and beta builds for 2.3 going is
still higher on his priority list, and he's only working on that in his
free time, but we all hope he gets to it (of course, first the machines
need to be racked up and bas
sean nathan bean wrote:
my update has been spinning for a couple of hours now...
sean
Originally installed manually or from a software management update?
My SM 2.1 was installed from the mozilla repository, but openSUSE forgot
to take out the Check for Updates menu item like they normally d
WLS wrote:
Paul wrote:
Rex wrote:
Firefox went from version 4 to version 5 in less than 2 months - in
imitation of Google Chrome, who seem to be incrementing the version
every other week.
Please tell me Seamonkey isn't going to do the same thing so that by
the end of the year we're up to versio
my update has been spinning for a couple of hours now...
sean
--
Hey, this isn't my tagline! Who put this here?
courtesy of TagZilla 0.066.2
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/supp
Jay O'Brien wrote:
I Agree, it has been doing this exact thing to me on three
different computers with three different email addresses
on att.net for several months. No one seems concerned.
Sometimes I have to send as many as seven times before it
finally is accepted. ATT/Yahoo is no help, either
I'm experiencing this bug with FireFTP 1.99.5 in SeaMonkey 2.2 on
openSUSE 11.3.
https://www.mozdev.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24131
The original filer of the bug is using FireFTP 1.99.4, openSUSE 11.4 and
Firefox 5.
Does anyone see this in other Linux distros such as Ubuntu, Fedora, and
what
Paul wrote:
Rex wrote:
Firefox went from version 4 to version 5 in less than 2 months - in
imitation of Google Chrome, who seem to be incrementing the version
every other week.
Please tell me Seamonkey isn't going to do the same thing so that by
the end of the year we're up to version 3.5 or 4,
Rex wrote:
Firefox went from version 4 to version 5 in less than 2 months - in
imitation of Google Chrome, who seem to be incrementing the version
every other week.
Please tell me Seamonkey isn't going to do the same thing so that by the
end of the year we're up to version 3.5 or 4, and 5 by ne
Rex wrote:
Firefox went from version 4 to version 5 in less than 2 months - in
imitation of Google Chrome, who seem to be incrementing the version
every other week.
Please tell me Seamonkey isn't going to do the same thing so that by the
end of the year we're up to version 3.5 or 4, and 5 by next
Firefox went from version 4 to version 5 in less than 2 months - in
imitation of Google Chrome, who seem to be incrementing the version
every other week.
Please tell me Seamonkey isn't going to do the same thing so that by the
end of the year we're up to version 3.5 or 4, and 5 by next year.
Las
I thought I'd have another try with Seamonkey 2.1 but ran into a couple
of problems.
(1) I thought I saw SM say it was importing FF5 bookmarks but must have
been mistaken. I know other browsers can't manage that trick but would
have thought another Mozilla product would have been up to the task
On 2011-07-05 22:46, Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote:
> Recently my system has begun to issue the following error
> when I try to send out emails on this account:
> "Sending of message failed. An error occurred sending mail:
> Unable to authenticate to SMTP server smtp.att.yahoo.com.
> It does not suppor
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Daniel schrieb:
Hey, KaiRo, when you talk here about machines for further SM 2.0.x
updates, and elsewhere about machines for 64bit Linux builds, are these
machines under the full time control of the SeaMonkey Council, or are
they Mozilla owned machines that the SM council ge
MCBastos wrote:
Interviewed by CNN on 07/07/2011 18:12, goldtech told the world:
Please explain why it's necessary for addons to break when ever a new
version of FF or SM comes out. Can not it be coded so that all the
tools I use will continue to work? I don't get it - would someone
explain?
Daniel schrieb:
Hey, KaiRo, when you talk here about machines for further SM 2.0.x
updates, and elsewhere about machines for 64bit Linux builds, are these
machines under the full time control of the SeaMonkey Council, or are
they Mozilla owned machines that the SM council gets occasional access t
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Ant schrieb:
And no more 2.0.x updates?
No, the platform for those releases isn't maintained any more and so the
SeaMonkey team can't maintain the application there any more either.
Robert Kaiser
Hey, KaiRo, when you talk here about machines for further SM 2.0.x
upda
JeffM schrieb:
...then there is Google included an actual API for extensions
in their Chrome Browser.
There's an "Add-On SDK" for Mozilla software that does the same. Still,
add-ons built with that only or the Google Chrome API can do so much
less than full-blown add-ons for Mozilla products
34 matches
Mail list logo
