Bill Davidsen wrote:
Ray_Net wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Daniel schrieb:
Ant, is there any development still occuring in the 2.0.x series??
No development, and no security or stability fixing.
Robert Kaiser
It would be nice to have at least one "old" version having only security
and stability fixing, just to have the opportunity for the end-user (who
hate bugs, and other funny things) to pass from a milestone to another
one.
It would be nice if any Mozilla software were supported, but my read is
that it is no longer happening, and there are no bugfix releases. Every
six weeks you get to do your own QA and upgrade to a whole new version,
which may have fixes and will definitely have a bunch of new code with
bugs (I say that because you can't add code to something as big as SM
without introducing new bugs).
All products eventually become obsolete, and in the software world that
happens *very* quickly. I'm not surprised or miffed that Mozilla is on
the downslope given that I have a number of quality alternatives out
there to choose from to still be able to accomplish the tasks I care to
accomplish. I'll miss SM, but I'll move on from it if its incarnations
lose the functions and utility which until now have suited my work flow.
Some commercial users have complained that they can't do a QA cycle that
often, and according to the reports were told that Firefox is not
suitable for business use. I can dig out the link for anyone who hasn't
learned to use a search engine, I saw it in either networkworld.com or
slashdot.
For reasons I have yet to understand Firefox is the only acceptable
alternative to IE at my company - and even preferred for some reason for
some of our flow...but given the corporate security restrictions I have
to live with it really doesn't make much of a diff which/what I use in
the workplace...it becomes all about what I have to do/use to get the
task done.
Believe it or not, until about 5 odd years ago we still used Netscape as
an alternative browser for some specific site applications, and at that
time I was championing transitioning to SM just to get more of the
security updates into our system, but I couldn't get any traction with
the idea - the reason we kept using NS all had to do with certificate
handling. The commercial world being more inert in ability to deploy
upgrades on large scales over large networks....again, in the biz world
it's *all* about being able to get the job done, and stability.
So for me, if SM doesn't suit me beyond 2.0.14, I'll just stick to
2.0.14 and live with it being unsupported as long as I can still do the
things I want to get done with it. That's just how it goes...
--
- Rufus
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
