Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
Chris Ilias wrote:
On 2013-04-24 3:26 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
John Bessa wrote:
and my view is that composer is the way to go.
Composer is extremely old and hasn't been looked after in many
years. I'd suggest, if you want something this simple, that you
look into BlueGriffon, which is still currently being
developed.
<http://www.bluegriffon.org/>
...
Given that situation, and since BlueGriffon is a "next-generation
Web editor based on the rendering engine of Firefox," how about
the developers start bundling /that/ instead of Composer?
Sure, take out the part that the rest of us use for what we do,
and replace with something that suits you better. Composer works
perfectly for what it does, ideal for small simple web pages, HTML
documents, etc.
AFAIK, that's what BlueGriffon does. "BlueGriffon is an intuitive
application that provides Web authors (beginners or more advanced)
with a simple User Interface allowing to create attractive Web sites
without requiring extensive technical knowledge about Web
Standards."
In that case, could you give us a quick readout of the potential upsides
and downsides of integrating it into the suite in place of Composer?
What impediments would there be -- technical, legal, logistical, etc.?
How doable is it?
P.S. Sorry, I tried to send this to mozilla.dev.apps.seamonkey, but
SeaMonkey refused to cooperate. Do I need to be subscribed to post there?
Yes.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Sex on television can't hurt you unless you fall off.
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
