Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Anyone else have any experience with this? Losing my browsing history is no big deal. Having to reconstruct my passwords file is a very big deal. Love the Philip Taylor sig, but I have to disagree with dsavitsk on the 4x3 screens. Widescreen is much better IMHO. There are a lot of old guys here, it seems, and I am one of them! Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy, but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003 and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent developments). And 4x3 screens on laptops! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
DrSlider wrote:
Anyone else have any experience with this? Losing my browsing history is no big
deal. Having to reconstruct my passwords file is a very big deal.
Love the Philip Taylor sig, but I have to disagree with dsavitsk on the 4x3
screens. Widescreen is much better IMHO. There are a lot of old guys here, it
seems, and I am one of them!
Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy,
but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003
and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent
developments).
And 4x3 screens on laptops!
As I reported earlier, I used my computer's System Restore function to
go back one week to the SM 2.0.11 I had before my foolish consenting to
install ('Click here. Faster than ever!') SM 2.2.
Everything was pretty much as before, with no loss of data. At first,
SM 2.0.11 wouldn't open, but an additional reboot fixed that.
You mention your passwords file. Hmm. Twice I have posted here that I
use something called RoboForm Pro (which doesn't support SM 2.2), and
asked about alternatives. No responses. I'm pretty sure that RoboForm
Pro was originally recommended to me by someone on this site, many years
ago. I gather that Password Manager just lists passwords and doesn't
actually fill them in automatically (with a single click) for a given
site, which is what RoboForm Pro does. I have never actually used it.
- Ken (in Oz)
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Ken wrote:
DrSlider wrote:
Anyone else have any experience with this? Losing my browsing history
is no big deal. Having to reconstruct my passwords file is a very big
deal.
Love the Philip Taylor sig, but I have to disagree with dsavitsk on
the 4x3 screens. Widescreen is much better IMHO. There are a lot of
old guys here, it seems, and I am one of them!
Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy,
but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003
and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent
developments).
And 4x3 screens on laptops!
As I reported earlier, I used my computer's System Restore function to
go back one week to the SM 2.0.11 I had before my foolish consenting to
install ('Click here. Faster than ever!') SM 2.2.
Everything was pretty much as before, with no loss of data. At first, SM
2.0.11 wouldn't open, but an additional reboot fixed that.
You mention your passwords file. Hmm. Twice I have posted here that I
use something called RoboForm Pro (which doesn't support SM 2.2), and
asked about alternatives. No responses. I'm pretty sure that RoboForm
Pro was originally recommended to me by someone on this site, many years
ago. I gather that Password Manager just lists passwords and doesn't
actually fill them in automatically (with a single click) for a given
site, which is what RoboForm Pro does. I have never actually used it.
- Ken (in Oz)
You might want to update to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 to fix the security
vulnerabilities found in 2.0.11, 2.0.12 and 2.0.14.
http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/seamonkey20.html
--
Using SeaMonkey 2.4a2 on openSUSE 11.3 Linux
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Ken schrieb: I gather that Password Manager just lists passwords and doesn't actually fill them in automatically You gather wrong. Robert Kaiser -- Note that any statements of mine - no matter how passionate - are never meant to be offensive but very often as food for thought or possible arguments that we as a community should think about. And most of the time, I even appreciate irony and fun! :) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
WLS wrote:
Ken wrote:
DrSlider wrote:
Anyone else have any experience with this? Losing my browsing history
is no big deal. Having to reconstruct my passwords file is a very big
deal.
Love the Philip Taylor sig, but I have to disagree with dsavitsk on
the 4x3 screens. Widescreen is much better IMHO. There are a lot of
old guys here, it seems, and I am one of them!
Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on
philosophy,
but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003
and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent
developments).
And 4x3 screens on laptops!
As I reported earlier, I used my computer's System Restore function to
go back one week to the SM 2.0.11 I had before my foolish consenting to
install ('Click here. Faster than ever!') SM 2.2.
Everything was pretty much as before, with no loss of data. At first, SM
2.0.11 wouldn't open, but an additional reboot fixed that.
You mention your passwords file. Hmm. Twice I have posted here that I
use something called RoboForm Pro (which doesn't support SM 2.2), and
asked about alternatives. No responses. I'm pretty sure that RoboForm
Pro was originally recommended to me by someone on this site, many years
ago. I gather that Password Manager just lists passwords and doesn't
actually fill them in automatically (with a single click) for a given
site, which is what RoboForm Pro does. I have never actually used it.
- Ken (in Oz)
You might want to update to SeaMonkey 2.0.14 to fix the security
vulnerabilities found in 2.0.11, 2.0.12 and 2.0.14.
http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/seamonkey20.html
Oops! I meant 2.0.13.
Danke Phil :)
--
Using SeaMonkey 2.4a2 on openSUSE 11.3 Linux
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
W3BNR wrote: On 7/23/2011 5:17 PM PhillipJones submitted the following: Rufus wrote: Personally, I'll champion the 1.1.x series because even though I didn't use the Forms Manager there were enough people here who did to make it seem a very desired feature. 2.0.14 is working just fine for me...I'll be sticking with it. I agree. But if you have to go to 2 series. the 2.0.x is best version of the two series ever put out. 2.1 on you go down hill fast. Kills addons and Kill plugins. 2.2 I tried and only 4 helper files were listed. Before then the were 30-35 helper files listed. I'm one of the few that seems to have no problems with 2.2. Other than know bugs that have been around for some time, i.e. no space after smilies, etc. How few, out of the 82976 active users of all versions of SeaMonkey yesterday. 42964 being 2.0.14 3205 being 2.1 26381 being 2.2 The rest being older and newer versions. I also have no problems with SM 2.2, had only a couple crashes with 2.4a2, which I was one of the 19 active installations yesterday. If I read the table correctly. As to addons that SAY they won't work. Most do with a little push from Add-on Compatibility Reporter 0.8.7 I have the following 13 extensions that are actually working ok in 2.2 'Display Mail User Agent 1.6.6 will not work though (of course it quit working somewhere around 1.1.13 so I'm still using 1.6.5) Extensions (enabled: 13) * Add-on Compatibility Reporter 0.8.7 (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/add-on-compatibility-reporter/?src=api) * Autofill Forms 0.9.5.2 (https://blueimp.net/mozilla/) * BetterPrivacy 1.51 (http://netticat.ath.cx/extensions.html) * ChatZilla 0.9.87 (http://chatzilla.hacksrus.com/) * DOM Inspector 2.0.10 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/) * Display Mail User Agent 1.6.5 (http://www.juergen-ernst.de/addons/dispmua.html) * DownloadHelper 4.9.3 (http://www.downloadhelper.net) * FireFTP 1.99.5 (http://fireftp.mozdev.org) * JavaScript Debugger 0.9.88.2 (http://www.hacksrus.com/~ginda/venkman/) * Password Exporter 1.2.1 (http://passwordexporter.fligtar.com) * PrefBar 5.1.1 (http://prefbar.mozdev.org/) * Quote Colors 0.3 (http://quotecolors.mozdev.org/) * ShowIP 1.1 (http://code.google.com/p/firefox-showip/) ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
WLS wrote: W3BNR wrote: On 7/23/2011 5:17 PM PhillipJones submitted the following: Rufus wrote: Personally, I'll champion the 1.1.x series because even though I didn't use the Forms Manager there were enough people here who did to make it seem a very desired feature. 2.0.14 is working just fine for me...I'll be sticking with it. I agree. But if you have to go to 2 series. the 2.0.x is best version of the two series ever put out. 2.1 on you go down hill fast. Kills addons and Kill plugins. 2.2 I tried and only 4 helper files were listed. Before then the were 30-35 helper files listed. I'm one of the few that seems to have no problems with 2.2. Other than know bugs that have been around for some time, i.e. no space after smilies, etc. How few, out of the 82976 active users of all versions of SeaMonkey yesterday. 42964 being 2.0.14 3205 being 2.1 26381 being 2.2 The rest being older and newer versions. Where did you get these figures from, WLS?? -- Daniel ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Daniel wrote: WLS wrote: W3BNR wrote: On 7/23/2011 5:17 PM PhillipJones submitted the following: Rufus wrote: Personally, I'll champion the 1.1.x series because even though I didn't use the Forms Manager there were enough people here who did to make it seem a very desired feature. 2.0.14 is working just fine for me...I'll be sticking with it. I agree. But if you have to go to 2 series. the 2.0.x is best version of the two series ever put out. 2.1 on you go down hill fast. Kills addons and Kill plugins. 2.2 I tried and only 4 helper files were listed. Before then the were 30-35 helper files listed. I'm one of the few that seems to have no problems with 2.2. Other than know bugs that have been around for some time, i.e. no space after smilies, etc. How few, out of the 82976 active users of all versions of SeaMonkey yesterday. 42964 being 2.0.14 3205 being 2.1 26381 being 2.2 The rest being older and newer versions. Where did you get these figures from, WLS?? From the metrics page. https://metrics.mozilla.com/stats/seamonkey.shtml I think the developers do a great job considering the suite has so few users, compared to Firefox, which had 110405504 active installations yesterday. I don't know how they get these figures and can not vouch for their accuracy. -- Using SeaMonkey 2.4a2 on openSUSE 11.3 Linux ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
WLS wrote: From the metrics page. https://metrics.mozilla.com/stats/seamonkey.shtml I think the developers do a great job considering the suite has so few users, compared to Firefox, which had 110405504 active installations yesterday. I don't know how they get these figures and can not vouch for their accuracy. I would love to see those figures in a historical context (that is, how the total number of Seamonkey users has varied, and is varying, since it was first released). Philip Taylor ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Ken -- Hi guys. I have already posted the following as an adjunct to other threads but got no response. I will clarify below what I am seeking: Looks like I can't go back to SM 2.0.18 (I think it was - but it may have been 2.0.11). The 'Known Issues' note for SM 2.2 is headed (in bold), 'Data loss warning' and continues: 'If you use a profile with this or any later version and then try to go back to SeaMonkey 2.0, SeaMonkey will rename your history file to places.sqlite.corrupt and create a new places.qlite file, effectively resetting your browsing history.' Well, I don't pretend to understand all of that, but it does seem to be saying that I will lose data if I try to restore the SM version I had before. No? It would seem, from the text you cite and from the Known issues page : http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.2/#issues that the only expected data loss is your browsing history. Given that most of us now operate in paranoid mode, and clear the browser history on browser exit anyway, this does not seem to represent a serious risk. Like you, and like some other contributors to this list since the announcement/release of V2.2, I too feel that V2.2 has fixed far too much that ain't broke in the first place -- incremental releases should (IMHO) address security concerns, evolving standards such as CSS, and similar core issues, reserving major behavioural changes such as the new must use tabs philosophy and the no-longer-optional installation of Chatzilla for optional major release (i.e., Seamonkey 3). Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy, but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003 and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent developments). ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Gratitude to Philip Taylor for his response. Thanks, Philip. I saw one of your earlier posts (I think it was yours) about unwanted tabs in SM 2.2 and understood and sympathised completely. Please, anyone, what earlier version of SM might you recommend as particularly stable? Also - slightly off topic - can anyone tell me how to kill the box that opens every time I come here asking whether I want to compress my folders? (My answer would be - please tell me if I'm wrong - 'No, of course I don't want to do that unless I'm running out of space, but with a new computer and a vast hard drive, that seems to me hardly likely' - but the box gives me no such option, i.e., to say 'No', nor does it have a 'Don't show me this box in the future' option.) - Ken (in Oz) - Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: Ken -- Hi guys. I have already posted the following as an adjunct to other threads but got no response. I will clarify below what I am seeking: Looks like I can't go back to SM 2.0.18 (I think it was - but it may have been 2.0.11). The 'Known Issues' note for SM 2.2 is headed (in bold), 'Data loss warning' and continues: 'If you use a profile with this or any later version and then try to go back to SeaMonkey 2.0, SeaMonkey will rename your history file to places.sqlite.corrupt and create a new places.qlite file, effectively resetting your browsing history.' Well, I don't pretend to understand all of that, but it does seem to be saying that I will lose data if I try to restore the SM version I had before. No? It would seem, from the text you cite and from the Known issues page : http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.2/#issues that the only expected data loss is your browsing history. Given that most of us now operate in paranoid mode, and clear the browser history on browser exit anyway, this does not seem to represent a serious risk. Like you, and like some other contributors to this list since the announcement/release of V2.2, I too feel that V2.2 has fixed far too much that ain't broke in the first place -- incremental releases should (IMHO) address security concerns, evolving standards such as CSS, and similar core issues, reserving major behavioural changes such as the new must use tabs philosophy and the no-longer-optional installation of Chatzilla for optional major release (i.e., Seamonkey 3). Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy, but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003 and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent developments). ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
On 7/23/2011 6:54 AM Ken submitted the following: Gratitude to Philip Taylor for his response. Thanks, Philip. I saw one of your earlier posts (I think it was yours) about unwanted tabs in SM 2.2 and understood and sympathised completely. Please, anyone, what earlier version of SM might you recommend as particularly stable? Also - slightly off topic - can anyone tell me how to kill the box that opens every time I come here asking whether I want to compress my folders? (My answer would be - please tell me if I'm wrong - 'No, of course I don't want to do that unless I'm running out of space, but with a new computer and a vast hard drive, that seems to me hardly likely' - but the box gives me no such option, i.e., to say 'No', nor does it have a 'Don't show me this box in the future' option.) Try seleting Edit/Preferences/Mail Newsgroups/Network Storage and then changing the Disk Space box to a higher number. -- Ed http://mysite.verizon.net/vze1zhwu/ Powered by SeaMonkey: http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ Any philosophy that can be put in a nutshell belongs there. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
On 7/23/11, Ken muf...@labyrinth.net.au wrote: Gratitude to Philip Taylor for his response. Thanks, Philip. I saw one of your earlier posts (I think it was yours) about unwanted tabs in SM 2.2 and understood and sympathised completely. Please, anyone, what earlier version of SM might you recommend as particularly stable? The problem is that earlier versions have security issues. I can't find the SM page that lists security issues/fixes, so this will have to do http://secunia.com/advisories/45007/ Multiple vulnerabilities have been reported in Mozilla SeaMonkey, which can be exploited by malicious people to disclose potentially sensitive information, conduct cross-site scripting attacks, and compromise a user's system. Also - slightly off topic - can anyone tell me how to kill the box that opens every time I come here asking whether I want to compress my folders? I have no idea :( Lee (My answer would be - please tell me if I'm wrong - 'No, of course I don't want to do that unless I'm running out of space, but with a new computer and a vast hard drive, that seems to me hardly likely' - but the box gives me no such option, i.e., to say 'No', nor does it have a 'Don't show me this box in the future' option.) - Ken (in Oz) - Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: Ken -- Hi guys. I have already posted the following as an adjunct to other threads but got no response. I will clarify below what I am seeking: Looks like I can't go back to SM 2.0.18 (I think it was - but it may have been 2.0.11). The 'Known Issues' note for SM 2.2 is headed (in bold), 'Data loss warning' and continues: 'If you use a profile with this or any later version and then try to go back to SeaMonkey 2.0, SeaMonkey will rename your history file to places.sqlite.corrupt and create a new places.qlite file, effectively resetting your browsing history.' Well, I don't pretend to understand all of that, but it does seem to be saying that I will lose data if I try to restore the SM version I had before. No? It would seem, from the text you cite and from the Known issues page : http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.2/#issues that the only expected data loss is your browsing history. Given that most of us now operate in paranoid mode, and clear the browser history on browser exit anyway, this does not seem to represent a serious risk. Like you, and like some other contributors to this list since the announcement/release of V2.2, I too feel that V2.2 has fixed far too much that ain't broke in the first place -- incremental releases should (IMHO) address security concerns, evolving standards such as CSS, and similar core issues, reserving major behavioural changes such as the new must use tabs philosophy and the no-longer-optional installation of Chatzilla for optional major release (i.e., Seamonkey 3). Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy, but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003 and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent developments). ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy, but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003 and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent developments). And 4x3 screens on laptops! ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Best version ever put out in the 2 serious is 2.0x version. From 2. on goes down hill fast. Ken wrote: Gratitude to Philip Taylor for his response. Thanks, Philip. I saw one of your earlier posts (I think it was yours) about unwanted tabs in SM 2.2 and understood and sympathised completely. Please, anyone, what earlier version of SM might you recommend as particularly stable? Also - slightly off topic - can anyone tell me how to kill the box that opens every time I come here asking whether I want to compress my folders? (My answer would be - please tell me if I'm wrong - 'No, of course I don't want to do that unless I'm running out of space, but with a new computer and a vast hard drive, that seems to me hardly likely' - but the box gives me no such option, i.e., to say 'No', nor does it have a 'Don't show me this box in the future' option.) - Ken (in Oz) - Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: Ken -- Hi guys. I have already posted the following as an adjunct to other threads but got no response. I will clarify below what I am seeking: Looks like I can't go back to SM 2.0.18 (I think it was - but it may have been 2.0.11). The 'Known Issues' note for SM 2.2 is headed (in bold), 'Data loss warning' and continues: 'If you use a profile with this or any later version and then try to go back to SeaMonkey 2.0, SeaMonkey will rename your history file to places.sqlite.corrupt and create a new places.qlite file, effectively resetting your browsing history.' Well, I don't pretend to understand all of that, but it does seem to be saying that I will lose data if I try to restore the SM version I had before. No? It would seem, from the text you cite and from the Known issues page : http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.2/#issues that the only expected data loss is your browsing history. Given that most of us now operate in paranoid mode, and clear the browser history on browser exit anyway, this does not seem to represent a serious risk. Like you, and like some other contributors to this list since the announcement/release of V2.2, I too feel that V2.2 has fixed far too much that ain't broke in the first place -- incremental releases should (IMHO) address security concerns, evolving standards such as CSS, and similar core issues, reserving major behavioural changes such as the new must use tabs philosophy and the no-longer-optional installation of Chatzilla for optional major release (i.e., Seamonkey 3). Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy, but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003 and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent developments). -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.netmailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Personally, I'll champion the 1.1.x series because even though I didn't use the Forms Manager there were enough people here who did to make it seem a very desired feature. 2.0.14 is working just fine for me...I'll be sticking with it. -- - Rufus PhillipJones wrote: Best version ever put out in the 2 serious is 2.0x version. From 2. on goes down hill fast. Ken wrote: Gratitude to Philip Taylor for his response. Thanks, Philip. I saw one of your earlier posts (I think it was yours) about unwanted tabs in SM 2.2 and understood and sympathised completely. Please, anyone, what earlier version of SM might you recommend as particularly stable? Also - slightly off topic - can anyone tell me how to kill the box that opens every time I come here asking whether I want to compress my folders? (My answer would be - please tell me if I'm wrong - 'No, of course I don't want to do that unless I'm running out of space, but with a new computer and a vast hard drive, that seems to me hardly likely' - but the box gives me no such option, i.e., to say 'No', nor does it have a 'Don't show me this box in the future' option.) - Ken (in Oz) - Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: Ken -- Hi guys. I have already posted the following as an adjunct to other threads but got no response. I will clarify below what I am seeking: Looks like I can't go back to SM 2.0.18 (I think it was - but it may have been 2.0.11). The 'Known Issues' note for SM 2.2 is headed (in bold), 'Data loss warning' and continues: 'If you use a profile with this or any later version and then try to go back to SeaMonkey 2.0, SeaMonkey will rename your history file to places.sqlite.corrupt and create a new places.qlite file, effectively resetting your browsing history.' Well, I don't pretend to understand all of that, but it does seem to be saying that I will lose data if I try to restore the SM version I had before. No? It would seem, from the text you cite and from the Known issues page : http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.2/#issues that the only expected data loss is your browsing history. Given that most of us now operate in paranoid mode, and clear the browser history on browser exit anyway, this does not seem to represent a serious risk. Like you, and like some other contributors to this list since the announcement/release of V2.2, I too feel that V2.2 has fixed far too much that ain't broke in the first place -- incremental releases should (IMHO) address security concerns, evolving standards such as CSS, and similar core issues, reserving major behavioural changes such as the new must use tabs philosophy and the no-longer-optional installation of Chatzilla for optional major release (i.e., Seamonkey 3). Philip Taylor. who understands the the world must move on philosophy, but who nonetheless finds Windows/XP, Classic View, Office 2003 and so on infinitely more user friendly than any of the more recent developments). ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Ken wrote: And, if so, might somebody be kind enough to recommend me a good, stable version to install - with which I'm prepared to stay until I die. You must know that with SM you always need to upgrade, upgrade, upgrade and upgrade forever The developpers don't want to maintain ONE stable release with only bugs and security issues corrections. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
Rufus wrote: Personally, I'll champion the 1.1.x series because even though I didn't use the Forms Manager there were enough people here who did to make it seem a very desired feature. 2.0.14 is working just fine for me...I'll be sticking with it. I agree. But if you have to go to 2 series. the 2.0.x is best version of the two series ever put out. 2.1 on you go down hill fast. Kills addons and Kill plugins. 2.2 I tried and only 4 helper files were listed. Before then the were 30-35 helper files listed. -- Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.If it's Fixed, Don't Break it http://www.phillipmjones.netmailto:pjon...@kimbanet.com ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Separate post: please help, I want to go back to an earlier version of SM
On 7/23/2011 5:17 PM PhillipJones submitted the following: Rufus wrote: Personally, I'll champion the 1.1.x series because even though I didn't use the Forms Manager there were enough people here who did to make it seem a very desired feature. 2.0.14 is working just fine for me...I'll be sticking with it. I agree. But if you have to go to 2 series. the 2.0.x is best version of the two series ever put out. 2.1 on you go down hill fast. Kills addons and Kill plugins. 2.2 I tried and only 4 helper files were listed. Before then the were 30-35 helper files listed. I'm one of the few that seems to have no problems with 2.2. Other than know bugs that have been around for some time, i.e. no space after smilies, etc. As to addons that SAY they won't work. Most do with a little push from Add-on Compatibility Reporter 0.8.7 I have the following 13 extensions that are actually working ok in 2.2 'Display Mail User Agent 1.6.6 will not work though (of course it quit working somewhere around 1.1.13 so I'm still using 1.6.5) Extensions (enabled: 13) * Add-on Compatibility Reporter 0.8.7 (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/add-on-compatibility-reporter/?src=api) * Autofill Forms 0.9.5.2 (https://blueimp.net/mozilla/) * BetterPrivacy 1.51 (http://netticat.ath.cx/extensions.html) * ChatZilla 0.9.87 (http://chatzilla.hacksrus.com/) * DOM Inspector 2.0.10 (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/) * Display Mail User Agent 1.6.5 (http://www.juergen-ernst.de/addons/dispmua.html) * DownloadHelper 4.9.3 (http://www.downloadhelper.net) * FireFTP 1.99.5 (http://fireftp.mozdev.org) * JavaScript Debugger 0.9.88.2 (http://www.hacksrus.com/~ginda/venkman/) * Password Exporter 1.2.1 (http://passwordexporter.fligtar.com) * PrefBar 5.1.1 (http://prefbar.mozdev.org/) * Quote Colors 0.3 (http://quotecolors.mozdev.org/) * ShowIP 1.1 (http://code.google.com/p/firefox-showip/) -- Ed http://www.jonesfarm.us Powered by SeaMonkey: http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ Ability is what will get you to the top if the boss has no daughter. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
