Re: are there still official seamonkey betas ?

Daniel wrote: > On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, bdelmee wrote: >> Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51: >>> bdelmee writes: >>> Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before 2.46 comes out.

Re: are there still official seamonkey betas ?

On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, bdelmee wrote: Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51: bdelmee writes: Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before 2.46 comes out. I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an

Re: are there still official seamonkey betas ?

On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote: Ahh seems he is looking for an easy way out. Lets just punish him worse. He needs to do the next releases also! FRG Edmund Wong wrote: if it's the guy who did the release... he should be sacked! And he thinks he's going to get some

Re: about:support

Richmond wrote: > I was trying both 2.40 and 2.49. OK I have it working now. I had to > install Thunar. I expect it is using the desktop environment settings > and I don't think I actually have one installed. > > I wonder why it didn't just use file:/// ? > Because file protocol does not

Re: are there still official seamonkey betas ?

l10n builds are still broken. Extensions needed to be removed in 2.46 for now. Now stalled with a mac OSX repack problem but this should hopefully be solved soon. FRG Felix Miata wrote: Edmund Wong composed on 2016-12-15 15:36 (UTC+0800): Fighting what? Since 18 Nov I've been using the Oct

Re: are there still official seamonkey betas ?

Edmund Wong composed on 2016-12-15 15:36 (UTC+0800): There will be betas.. just need the following to happen: 1) 2.46 is released 2) figure out if the next release is a beta (2.48) or release (2.47). 3) do a post-mortem discussion as to what the smeg went wrong with 2.46 and why hell