On 10/6/11, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Justin Wood (Callek) wrote: > > >> Insert -> Characters and Symbols > >> has no options. > > > > Rob, unfortunately this is a known issue, I plan to release an addon > within the week to correct this, as a hotfix. and will get the real fix into > a 2.4.2 *IFF* there is another reason for a "chemspill" release. > > In many ways, this hearkens back to my message of a day or > so ago, where I expressed my concerns that Seamonkey users > were beginning to lose their brand loyalty, almost certainly > as a result (direct or indirect) of Seamonkey's following > Firefox's rapid release schedule as well as its seeming > determination to follow Firefox's lead, regardless of whether > that lead is consistent with Seamonkey's heritage and the > expectations of its users. > > Having just read Justin's message (above), it seems to me > that Seamonkey is indeed suffering as a result of those two > philosophies, and I would therefore like to offer, for > serious consideration, an alternative which I /think/ might > help to retain Seamonkey's existing user base, and perhaps > even enlarge it if Firefox users are similarly getting > p****d off with the problems that seem automatically > to follow from the need to release on such a tight > time-scale. > > I would like to propose that Seamonkey continue to make > use of Firefox and Gecko as its core components (I do > not know to what extent it also draws on Thunderbird), > but rather than slavishly following Firefox's 6-week > cycle, it adopts an altogether more leisurely approach. > > What I propose is that Seamonkey aim at a 6-month release > cycle, using Firefox/Gecko from six months ago as its > basis. This will allow adequate time to identify bugs, > features that are counter-intuitive to Seamonkey users, > ill-advised design decisions, and so on. > > This does not mean that later Firefoxes/Geckos will > necessarily be ignored; if, for example, they address > a bug in the version selected as the basis for the > next Seamonkey, then of course the bug fix can be > incorporated. But there should be no last-minute > (or last week, or perhaps even last month) changes : > there should be a good, stable Seamonkey in beta-test > for at least a month before it is released to Seamonkey > users in general. > > Comments, please ?
I'd love it if Seamonkey went back to a sane release schedule. Unfortunately, I don't think that's a viable option. It'd be nice if one of the devs that understands the details would chime in, but my understanding is that there aren't enough SM developers to maintain a separate code base for SM. The FF releases contain new features as well as bug fixes & the effort to back-port just the FF bug fixes to an older SM code base would range from just time consuming to impossible. Given the choice of using "rapid-release" software with no known vulnerabilities vs. "stable" software with known issues I'll deal with the upgrade problems and use the more secure software. Lee > > Philip Taylor > _______________________________________________ > support-seamonkey mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey > _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
