Interviewed by CNN on 23/06/2011 18:32, Ray_Net told the world: > Robert Kaiser wrote: >> Ray_Net schrieb: >>> But it would be nice to have a longer life of a supported version ... >> >> A lot of things would be nice. Do you sign up to the job of backporting >> all those security patches? If so, we maybe can start talking about it. >> > Perhaps i have not explained correctly - The question is not for > backporting ... the question is just why do you change major versions so > often ?
"So often?" Seamonkey 1.x was essentially the same as Mozilla Application Suite 1.x -- that is, we had four years (98-2002) of Mozilla as a beta, plus four years (2002-2006) of Mozilla as a shipping product, PLUS three years of Seamonkey 1.x. That's *seven* years (counting only released products) with essentially the same product, making internal improvements but no major changes. Seamonkey 2 was released almost two years ago, and it was a major change -- from the old framework to the new toolkit, for starters. Seamonkey 2.1 was launched now, and it's technically considered a MINOR version, not a major version -- it essentially finished the transition job which began with the 2.0 release. Even if it you want to call it a major version (which it isn't), two years is a long, long time as browser versions go. -- MCBastos This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized use will be prosecuted under the DMCA. -=-=- ... Sent from my table at the Babylon 5 Zocalo. *Added by TagZilla 0.066.2 running on Seamonkey 2.1 * Get it at http://xsidebar.mozdev.org/modifiedmailnews.html#tagzilla _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
