Bill Davidsen schrieb:
Robert, I agree with the "should never break" part, but in practice
2.0.7 had major issue for some people and worked poorly or not at all.
I didn't have any issue with add-ons, and that is the topic here. The
other one was unfortunate and most of those were an older failure
existing for multiple version that was just uncovered by a mostly
unrelated change.
Changes to SM break add-ons from other sites,
which were installed to fix a perceived problem in many cases.
I haven't heard stories of any 2.0.x updates breaking any add-ons that
were marked compatible with 2.0.*, independent of what site they are from.
From my testing of 2.1 I would say that a clear spec of how to write
conforming extensions, possibly with some trivial example, is desirable.
Feel free to write one up, we are an open community. We are trying to
write up and maintain documents about the major changes, but we are
simply unable to document every single change, and we have to create the
actual application with a very small team first, else there simply isn't
anything to document.
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 needs answers to. And most of the time,
I even appreciate irony and fun! :)
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
