Phil Anderton wrote: > > Gervase Markham wrote: [snip]
> > Either: > > > > 1) You try and keep up with XUL development, and accept that things will > > break > > This is exactly what theme designers were doing, until the "fix" for bug > 99102 came along. Skins slowly degraded as XUL development proceeded, > but they still *worked*. Since this "fix", perfectly good themes are > *deleted* on the mere *suspicion* of incompatibility. > Oh my God, are you serious?!?! Mozilla is *deleting* themes it doesn't like? What, I suppose it checks them for Communist content and rejects them if they don't have enough for AOLs liking? > > 2) You make your skin for one specific Mozilla version > > or > > 3) You wait until XUL 1.0 and then make a skin. > > > > Those are your options. Magic option 4: > > > > 4) Make a skin and have it magically work with every Mozilla version ever > > > > does not exist. XUL will get frozen when it's ready, and not a moment > > later. > > 5) Designers turn their backs on Mozilla and find more productive pursuits. > Exactly. Hence there are no "skins" anymore, the one and only selling point AOL ever thought they had with this XUL insanity. Now all we get for it is a slow pig of a browser with nonnative behavior. > A great pity. It could have been avoided. Perhaps in a metaphysical alternate-reality sense, but not in the hands of Netscape cum AOL. No, this trainwreck was etched in granite before it even started.
