On 07/08/2015 09:01 AM, Daniel wrote:
On 8/07/2015 1:54 PM, »Q« wrote:
In <news:[email protected]>,
Paul Bergsagel <[email protected]> wrote:
Does SeaMonkey benefit, in the long run, with such a rapid
update schedule? If SeaMonkey adopted a less frequent update
schedule would the net benefits be greater than if SeaMonkey
continued with the current rapid update schedule?
Since the last SeaMonkey release, there have been over 40 MFSAs, many
of them critical. IMO (and it's only that) if SM decided out of policy
*not* to issue security updates in a timely manner, that would mark
the death of the project.
Hear, Hear!! If I've got a safe, secure Suite, would I care if I only
got a "Bells and Whistles" update every six months or so?? Not a
problem. My SM looks and feels much the same as NC 4.7, or earlier.
(This being cross-posted reminds me I still waiting on the "Mark
Cross-posts as Read" bugzilla to be fixed, Bug 43278. Worked in NC up
till about 4.7 but then not.)
I don't recall cross-posts ever being marked as read, but I may not have
been using NC back in 2000.
That would be nice to have.
--
Kubuntu 14.10 | KDE 4.14.1 | Thunderbird 42.0a1(Daily) Go Bucs!
[Coexist · Understanding Across Divides](https://www.coexist.org/)
[Visit Pittsburgh](http://www.visitpittsburgh.com)
[Anthrocon 2015: Viking Invasion! | "Fur, Fun, And So Much
More!"](http://www.anthrocon.org/)July 9-12, 2015
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
