On 07/08/2009 04:49 PM, Martin Feitag wrote:
> Ken Rudolph schrieb:
>> Even the thought of testing an "alpha" makes me shudder with angst. It
>> seems to me that the news-mail part of SM 1x is not nearly so deficient
>> and outdated as the browser portion. If it is Thunderbird 3 which is
>> holding up SM 2x then maybe SM 2.0 should be released with a lesser mail
>> client.
>> I guess I'm especially despondent because I've been a fanatical
>> supporter of the "suite" browser concept since Netscape 0.8 and now I
>> feel that nothing sufficiently modern is out there that I'm comfortable
>> using. The SeaMonkey Project is in danger of becoming irrelevant if they
>> keep dithering and waiting for utter perfection.
>> --Ken Rudolph
> According to Robert Kaiser it wasn't planned and they were pretty 
> surprised that the TB team struggled that much / was lacking a proper 
> plan or whatever. They are kinda angry because of that and it sounded 
> like that there will be taken actions to prevent such thing happening again.
> regards
> Martin
> PS: As said for an alpha it's very stable, don't compare it too much 
> with other alphas you might have tested, as the codebase is pretty 
> mature. Of course it's not recommended to replace SM1 with SM2 yet in a 
> productivity environment but having SM2 parallely doesn't harm and keeps 
> up the hope/interest ;-)

I've found, for the most part, that the 2.0b1pre is, IMO, more stable
than 2.0a. With the exception of one or two instances, the 2.0b1pre has
been pretty solid & I use it on 4 production machines. I of course have
1.1.17 also installed as a backup, but so far the only time that I ever
fire up 1.1.x anymore is to test something.

support-seamonkey mailing list

Reply via email to