OK! Thanks for letting me know. It will not happen again.
/ David
RV wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
RV wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Bug filed.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125885
Since you agree, please comment in the bug listing! I guess, the
more people that backs
David Tenser wrote:
Bug filed.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125885
Since you agree, please comment in the bug listing! I guess, the more
people that backs up this suggestion, the more likely that it will be
implemented.
This is probably an enhancement that would take
David Tenser wrote:
RV wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Bug filed.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125885
Since you agree, please comment in the bug listing! I guess, the more
people that backs up this suggestion, the more likely that it will be
implemented.
Well,
David Tenser wrote:
Enable interval mail checking and check mail on startup.
I find it wierd that you want to have to click the Get Msgs button in
order to get new messages ;-)
Hehe... well, that's a solution to the problem. But I still think the
button should download all accounts by
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Enable interval mail checking and check mail on startup.
I find it wierd that you want to have to click the Get Msgs button in
order to get new messages ;-)
Hehe... well, that's a solution to the problem. But I still think the
button should
On 2/16/2002 10:07 AM, David Tenser wrote:
snip
This leads to a question I've been wanting to ask for quite some time
now: Is filing a bug report the correct way to suggest improvements?
Of should improvements be filed to another place?
It's the correct way. There's a severity field called
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Blake Ross wrote:
Does this mean that they haven't had the time to add this feature in
four years?
No, it means that few of Mozilla's distributor's customers have been
clamoring for it, and thus it's not a priority. Why would a
David Tenser wrote:
I guess. I'm a VB coder, so it would probably take more time for me to
get familiar with the code than it would take for Netscape to implement
this themselves :(
I don't do C++ either (yet), but I have found it surprisingly easy to
learn to hack on Mozilla's front-end.
Pratik wrote:
On 2/16/2002 10:07 AM, David Tenser wrote:
snip
This leads to a question I've been wanting to ask for quite some time
now: Is filing a bug report the correct way to suggest improvements?
Of should improvements be filed to another place?
It's the correct way. There's a
I'm totally confused.
I've downloaded and installed cygwin and Perl. The instructions says:
1* Set up Patch Maker (see above.)
2* Change to the chrome directory of a Mozilla nightly build.
3* Execute pmn to unjar your chrome.
4* [...]
First of all, I fail to set up Patch
David Tenser wrote:
I'm totally confused.
I've downloaded and installed cygwin and Perl. The instructions says:
1* Set up Patch Maker (see above.)
2* Change to the chrome directory of a Mozilla nightly build.
3* Execute pmn to unjar your chrome.
4* [...]
First of
Thanks for clearing this up for me! I have now successfully unjarred
chrome (whatever that means).
I'm feeling stupid, I'm a programmer and can't follow these
instructions! :( Am I being ignorant?
I found them a bit hard to follow as well, especially since the first
version of Patch
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jonas
Jørgensen wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Thanks for clearing this up for me! I have now successfully unjarred
chrome (whatever that means).
JAR files are like ZIP files.
in fact, i think it is true that JAR files _are_ ZIP files.
if you simply rename a
Correct.
michael lefevre wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jonas
Jørgensen wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Thanks for clearing this up for me! I have now successfully unjarred
chrome (whatever that means).
JAR files are like ZIP files.
in fact, i think it is true that JAR files _are_
Jonas Jørgensen wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Thanks for clearing this up for me! I have now successfully unjarred
chrome (whatever that means).
JAR files are like ZIP files.
In fact JAR files *are* ZIP files if I'm not mistaken.
Unjarring the chrome means unzipping the
JAR files in
JTK wrote:
Pascal Chevrel wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Yes, it's obvious that Mozilla's aim is to make a near-perfect, secure
webpage renderer. Gecko is the heart of it all.
The problem is, too few real people are actually using Mozilla, so no
one knows just how many security holes there is
Matt Williams wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Matt Williams wrote:
David, for those of us who are novice users what are the things you
would like to see added/changed/fixed.
Various things. Some examples (please let me know if something
requested here is already in there!):
* General:
Well, the oldest comment for that bug is from 1998!!
Does this mean that they haven't had the time to add this feature in
four years?
/ David
Christian Biesinger wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
I've been using Mozilla for a week now and I was thinking of
completely switch to it starting from
Does this mean that they haven't had the time to add this feature in
four years?
No, it means that few of Mozilla's distributor's customers have been
clamoring for it, and thus it's not a priority. Why would a feature be
added because a bug filer wanted it? Do you think that's how things
David Tenser wrote:
Matt Williams wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Matt Williams wrote:
David, for those of us who are novice users what are the things you
would like to see added/changed/fixed.
Various things. Some examples (please let me know if something
requested here is
Tim Wunder wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
snip
I just find it weird having to select each and every Inbox and press
Get Msgs. Why would I only want to check one account at a time, and if
I wanted to, I could click on the little arrow next to the button and
select that account. I
In other words, the only way to get a feature implemented is to keep on
posting it as a bug, which will lead to more overhead work for the poor
guys who have to wade through the duplicates every day.
Surely there must be more than one guy back in -98 who wants to have
better filtering options
David Tenser wrote:
I've been using Mozilla for a week now and I was thinking of completely
switch to it starting from today. Then I discovered the lack of a
feature that I use very often: The ability to set up a message
rule/filter to forward any incoming email message to another email
I'm starting to understand that more and more. But why is that really?
How come several developers and hundreds of fellow coders out there on a
massive open source project can't outsmart simple programs like Outlook
Express when it comes to functionality?
Of course, one reason could be that
David Tenser wrote:
I'm starting to understand that more and more. But why is that really?
How come several developers and hundreds of fellow coders out there on a
massive open source project can't outsmart simple programs like Outlook
Express when it comes to functionality?
Two
JTK wrote:
...exactly. This isn't rocket science, it's brain surgery.
Are you implying rocket science is more complicated than brain surgery?
Anyone who think or believe the cliche about rocket science is in
desperate need for a brain surgeon.
There's simply no excuse (though you'll hear
Yes, it's obvious that Mozilla's aim is to make a near-perfect, secure
webpage renderer. Gecko is the heart of it all.
The problem is, too few real people are actually using Mozilla, so no
one knows just how many security holes there is in it (and I bet it's
*hundreds*, based on the the
David Tenser wrote:
Yes, it's obvious that Mozilla's aim is to make a near-perfect, secure
webpage renderer. Gecko is the heart of it all.
First of all David, Please stop feeding the troll.
You probably just subscribed to these newsgroups/lists, but I've been
here long enough to tell you
I'm not trying to be anybody's friend (or fiend) here. But you are
absolutely right in that I'm pretty new at this (Mozilla and it's
newsgroups).
All I'm trying to do is to post constructive criticism to the newsgroup.
This is because in the end I want to be able to switch to Mozilla
David Tenser wrote:
Yes, it's obvious that Mozilla's aim is to make a near-perfect, secure
webpage renderer. Gecko is the heart of it all.
The problem is, too few real people are actually using Mozilla, so no
one knows just how many security holes there is in it (and I bet it's
Just wanted to make this point perfectly clear: I like Mozilla! Since
the day I downloaded a month ago, I've been trying hard to use it
whenever possible, restarting it if it crashed, and importing all my
mail from Outlook Express.
If I didn't like Mozilla, I wouldn't be here asking questions
Mozilla is a *living* project. I download new builds every weekday,
which is very exciting and unusual (although I miss a traditional
whatsnew.txt file that explains what's been changed in every nighly
build).
Try the BuildBar at http://www.mozillazine.org/, run by Asa. Every
effort is
Matt Williams wrote:
David, for those of us who are novice users what are the things you
would like to see added/changed/fixed.
Various things. Some examples (please let me know if something requested
here is already in there!):
* General: better toolbar customizations
The ability to
David Tenser wrote:
Matt Williams wrote:
David, for those of us who are novice users what are the things you
would like to see added/changed/fixed.
Various things. Some examples (please let me know if something requested
here is already in there!):
* General: better toolbar
David Tenser wrote:
* General: Ability to change keyboard shortcuts. This is something that
many programs lacks, including IE. If you use a particular feature
often, you should be able to assign a keyboard shortcut to it.
The funny part is that on Gnome, the crappiest program lets you do
Kryptolus wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Yes, it's obvious that Mozilla's aim is to make a near-perfect, secure
webpage renderer. Gecko is the heart of it all.
First of all David, Please stop feeding the troll.
My ears are burning!
You probably just subscribed to these newsgroups/lists,
Pascal Chevrel wrote:
David Tenser wrote:
Yes, it's obvious that Mozilla's aim is to make a near-perfect, secure
webpage renderer. Gecko is the heart of it all.
The problem is, too few real people are actually using Mozilla, so no
one knows just how many security holes there is in it
I've been using Mozilla for a week now and I was thinking of completely
switch to it starting from today. Then I discovered the lack of a
feature that I use very often: The ability to set up a message
rule/filter to forward any incoming email message to another email
address, based on
38 matches
Mail list logo
