On 11-07-10 12:58 PM, Lee wrote:
On 7/10/11, Chris Ilias<[email protected]> wrote:
On 11-07-09 2:11 PM, Lee wrote:
But the downside is that Mozilla is forcing everyone still using their
browser to be alpha/beta testers by not keeping a "stable" version of
the software supported.
SeaMonkey 2.2 and Firefox 5 are stable.
The SeaMonkey dev team has done an excellent job of creating a quality
product. So in that sense, yes, SM is "stable". But what I meant by
"stable" in the context of "forcing everyone still using their browser
to be alpha/beta testers" is a release train with no new features -
just patches.
And those new features have already gone through alpha/beta testing and
have been deemed ready for end-users.
Why in the world the Mozilla folk think going to a rapid release
system is going to win back their lost "mindshare" (FF usage: down.
chrome usage: up) is beyond me.
It has nothing to do with whatever you call mindshare, and more to do
with not letting unfinished features prevent other improvements (like
CSS animations) from getting out to users when they are ready.
I suspect there's lot of SM users that would prefer to stay on the
same release train (eg. 2.2.x) and not upgrade to the next release
train until all of the addons they use have been updated to work work
with the new release train. Even if it meant living without CSS
animations..
So your issue about add-on compatibility, not forking old releases,
correct? In other words, if all your add-ons were compatible with SM 2.2
when 2.2 was released, you wouldn't mind the rapid release, correct?
--
Chris Ilias <http://ilias.ca>
Mailing list/Newsgroup moderator
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
