INFO WG wrote:
Sadly, another reason all efforts should have been long ago placed on
SM 2.
1) You're assuming that effort on SeaMonkey 1.1.x releases takes away
from efforts on SeaMonkey 2.0.
2) You really want SeaMonkey 1.1.x to not get security releases, leaving
us without a stable, up-to
In response to Robert Kaiser's:
From: Robert Kaiser
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:35:44 +0100 >>
Robert Kaiser (RK) wrote:
> Is the above the ravings of a madman or one who is not in the know?
RK: Not a madman, but someone who doesn't have a good view into how we
actually are spending our time o
2 matches
Mail list logo
