On 7/11/11, Chris Ilias <[email protected]> wrote: > 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?
Add-on compatibility is a subset of 'everything working properly after an upgrade.' If everything continues to work properly after an upgrade, no, I don't mind the rapid release. Work, I suspect, is going to mind rapid-release since they do test before deploying. One of the email staff at work told me that Lotus iNotes works better with FF than IE. So I gave FF a try & it wouldn't work at all for me. Turns out I'd upgraded, he hadn't & if I wanted to be able to get to iNotes with FF I'd have to downgrade to 3.6 or wait for some Notes patch.. Regards, Lee _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
