Just wondering re: new seamonkey version?

[jvandyke]

I feel that seamonkey is wonderful for my uses -- but unfortunately know 
zero about programming at this stage in life, and don't even know how to 
help support it. I do know from the messages I've read, that there are 
so many obstacles in place regarding conversion changes, that it has 
been rather impossible to be able to do this.


Is there any hope in sight for a new version?

I'm having problems just getting some stuff to work these days, that I'm 
having to do a lot of workarounds... some work and some do not.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering re: new seamonkey version?

[Paul in Houston, TX]

Jeff wrote:

I feel that seamonkey is wonderful for my uses -- but unfortunately know
zero about programming at this stage in life, and don't even know how to
help support it. I do know from the messages I've read, that there are
so many obstacles in place regarding conversion changes, that it has
been rather impossible to be able to do this.

Is there any hope in sight for a new version?

I'm having problems just getting some stuff to work these days, that I'm
having to do a lot of workarounds... some work and some do not.


Per your headers you are already using the latest SM version.
I don't quite understand the question but suspect you mean some sites 
don't work.
Unfortunately web page scripters nowadays concentrate on Google Chrome 
and iphones and ignore other browsers.  Not much we can do about it.
You can try changing your general.useragent.override or site specific 
overrides.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Just wondering re: new seamonkey version?

[Jeff]

I feel that seamonkey is wonderful for my uses -- but unfortunately know 
zero about programming at this stage in life, and don't even know how to 
help support it. I do know from the messages I've read, that there are 
so many obstacles in place regarding conversion changes, that it has 
been rather impossible to be able to do this.


Is there any hope in sight for a new version?

I'm having problems just getting some stuff to work these days, that I'm 
having to do a lot of workarounds... some work and some do not.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[Daniel]

On 4/02/2017 11:08 PM, Mr. Ed wrote:

On 02/04/17 6:59 AM, Mr. Ed wrote:

On 02/04/17 4:19 AM, Daniel wrote:

On 4/02/2017 10:25 AM, WaltS48 wrote:

On 02/03/2017 03:24 PM, Mr. Ed wrote:

Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the
Subject, The
OS and SM version together.
While it's true that some (many?) bugs will have an effect on more
than one OS
or SM version we would not have to look at message headers to
determine what
could be a simple entry in the Subject field.

Just wondering...



To add to what Paul indicated.

Some of us have, "mailnews.headers.showUserAgent" set to "true" so we
see your user agent in the message header.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:51.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.48


which makes me wonder ... as the latest SM available from
http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ is V 2.46, is Mr Ed really using a V 2.48
or is he using a V 2.48b1 or similar??


Whatever 'UserAgent' says.  I haven't changed it except to 'not advertise FF'
option.

https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/~akalla/unofficial/seamonkey/nightly/


Woops, wrong place for 2.48 -  It's here (UNOFFICIAL):

http://www.m64.info/index.php/seamonkey-64-bit-download

One wonders who runs m64.info, as the real SeaMonkey website is 
http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ !!


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.46 Build identifier: 20161213183751

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.38 Build identifier: 20150903203501

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[mozilla-lists . mbourne]

Mr. Ed wrote:

Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the Subject, The
OS and SM version together.
While it's true that some (many?) bugs will have an effect on more than one OS
or SM version we would not have to look at message headers to determine what
could be a simple entry in the Subject field.


IMHO, I wouldn't say OS and version are necessarily always appropriate 
in the subject line, but should certainly be mentioned in the body of 
the message. If the issue is directly related to a specific version/OS 
(e.g. problems installing or immediately after upgrading) it's probably 
relevant in the subject, but not necessarily when asking how to do 
something which will probably be the same across many different 
versions. In the latter case, the OS and SM version should still be 
mentioned in the body of the message though, in case it is relevant.


As for reasons people don't include the that information even in the 
body... I can only guess but perhaps they don't consider that it might 
be relevant, don't realise that any OS other than Windows exists, or 
they're using the latest released version and assume that will be 
everyone else's default assumption. And, of course, we all occasionally 
forget to mention some details.


Determining the OS and version someone is using from the user-agent in 
the message headers isn't always reliable, so even if the information is 
there it's useful to confirm it in the body of the message. They might 
not be posting the message from the version/OS they're having problems 
with (so the user-agent in headers might be misleading), or might be 
posting via another application or service (e.g. Google Groups), or they 
might be spoofing the user-agent string (so again it could be 
misleading), or all sorts of other possibilities... Plus it's more 
convenient for the reader to have the information in the body of the 
message rather than looking in the headers.


--
Mark.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[Lee]

On 2/4/17, Mr. Ed  wrote:
>>
>> https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/~akalla/unofficial/seamonkey/nightly/
>>
> Woops, wrong place for 2.48 -  It's here (UNOFFICIAL):

you had it almost right the first time
https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/~akalla/unofficial/seamonkey/nightly/latest-comm-release-windows64/

and the 32 bit version is here
https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/~akalla/unofficial/seamonkey/nightly/latest-comm-release-windows32/

Lee
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[Mr. Ed]

On 02/04/17 6:59 AM, Mr. Ed wrote:
> On 02/04/17 4:19 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> On 4/02/2017 10:25 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>> On 02/03/2017 03:24 PM, Mr. Ed wrote:
>>>> Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the
>>>> Subject, The
>>>> OS and SM version together.
>>>> While it's true that some (many?) bugs will have an effect on more
>>>> than one OS
>>>> or SM version we would not have to look at message headers to
>>>> determine what
>>>> could be a simple entry in the Subject field.
>>>>
>>>> Just wondering...
>>>>
>>>
>>> To add to what Paul indicated.
>>>
>>> Some of us have, "mailnews.headers.showUserAgent" set to "true" so we
>>> see your user agent in the message header.
>>>
>>> Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:51.0) Gecko/20100101
>>> SeaMonkey/2.48
>>>
>> which makes me wonder ... as the latest SM available from
>> http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ is V 2.46, is Mr Ed really using a V 2.48
>> or is he using a V 2.48b1 or similar??
>>
> Whatever 'UserAgent' says.  I haven't changed it except to 'not advertise FF'
> option.
>
> https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/~akalla/unofficial/seamonkey/nightly/
>
Woops, wrong place for 2.48 -  It's here (UNOFFICIAL):

http://www.m64.info/index.php/seamonkey-64-bit-download

-- 
"This is America!  You can't make a horse
 testify against himself!"  Mister Ed

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[Mr. Ed]

  
  
On 02/04/17 4:19 AM, Daniel wrote:

On
  4/02/2017 10:25 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
  
  On 02/03/2017 03:24 PM, Mr. Ed wrote:

Just wondering why the majority of the
  posts do not mention, in the
  
  Subject, The
  
  OS and SM version together.
  
  While it's true that some (many?) bugs will have an effect on
  more
  
  than one OS
  
  or SM version we would not have to look at message headers to
  
  determine what
  
  could be a simple entry in the Subject field.
  
  
  Just wondering...
  
  


To add to what Paul indicated.


Some of us have, "mailnews.headers.showUserAgent" set to "true"
so we

see your user agent in the message header.


Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:51.0)
Gecko/20100101

SeaMonkey/2.48


  
  which makes me wonder ... as the latest SM available from
  http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ is V 2.46, is Mr Ed really using
  a V 2.48 or is he using a V 2.48b1 or similar??
  
  

Whatever 'UserAgent' says.  I haven't
  changed it except to 'not advertise FF' option.
  
https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/~akalla/unofficial/seamonkey/nightly/

-- 
"This is America!  You can't make a horse
 testify against himself!"  Mister Ed
  


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[Daniel]

On 4/02/2017 10:25 AM, WaltS48 wrote:

On 02/03/2017 03:24 PM, Mr. Ed wrote:

Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the
Subject, The
OS and SM version together.
While it's true that some (many?) bugs will have an effect on more
than one OS
or SM version we would not have to look at message headers to
determine what
could be a simple entry in the Subject field.

Just wondering...



To add to what Paul indicated.

Some of us have, "mailnews.headers.showUserAgent" set to "true" so we
see your user agent in the message header.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:51.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.48

which makes me wonder ... as the latest SM available from 
http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ is V 2.46, is Mr Ed really using a V 
2.48 or is he using a V 2.48b1 or similar??


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.46 Build identifier: 20161213183751

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.38 Build identifier: 20150903203501

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[WaltS48]

On 02/03/2017 03:24 PM, Mr. Ed wrote:

Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the Subject, The
OS and SM version together.
While it's true that some (many?) bugs will have an effect on more than one OS
or SM version we would not have to look at message headers to determine what
could be a simple entry in the Subject field.

Just wondering...



To add to what Paul indicated.

Some of us have, "mailnews.headers.showUserAgent" set to "true" so we 
see your user agent in the message header.


Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:51.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.48


--
Visit Pittsburgh <http://www.visitpittsburgh.com/>
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04LTS
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[Alexander Yudenitsch]

Paul B. Gallagher wrote, on 03 Feb 17 20:23:


Mr. Ed wrote:


Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the
Subject, The OS and SM version together. While it's true that some
(many?) bugs will have an effect on more than one OS or SM version we
would not have to look at message headers to determine what could be
a simple entry in the Subject field.


Probably because:

1) Most posters assume that readers can easily do CTRL-U to see that
info in the OP's message header (assuming they're posting with the
relevant version of SM/OS);

2) Many posters mention that info in their message body, which is more
convenient for the reader;

3) Some posters are forgetful, rude, etc.

I personally agree that the SM version should be mentioned in the
subject, but since I read all posts anyway, it's all the same to me.


Also, many posts are not OS/version-specific -- like this thread, 
frinstance...  :-)


--
Thanks beforehand for your attention, and I hope to hear from you soon.

s) Alexander Yudenitsch   <ale...@postpro.net>



___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Just wondering............

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Mr. Ed wrote:


Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the
Subject, The OS and SM version together. While it's true that some
(many?) bugs will have an effect on more than one OS or SM version we
would not have to look at message headers to determine what could be
a simple entry in the Subject field.

Just wondering...


Probably because:

1) Most posters assume that readers can easily do CTRL-U to see that 
info in the OP's message header (assuming they're posting with the 
relevant version of SM/OS);


2) Many posters mention that info in their message body, which is more 
convenient for the reader;


3) Some posters are forgetful, rude, etc.

I personally agree that the SM version should be mentioned in the 
subject, but since I read all posts anyway, it's all the same to me.


--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Just wondering............

[Mr. Ed]

Just wondering why the majority of the posts do not mention, in the Subject, The
OS and SM version together.
While it's true that some (many?) bugs will have an effect on more than one OS
or SM version we would not have to look at message headers to determine what
could be a simple entry in the Subject field. 

Just wondering...

-- 
"This is America!  You can't make a horse
 testify against himself!"  Mister Ed

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey