Paul Bergsagel wrote:
Edmund Wong wrote:
I've been dedicating most of my time working on getting builds on Win32
running. I know it isn't much and there are a lot of other stuff I was
hoping to do (particularly Sync).
I do apologize for the lack of updates; but, as it is, we're really
down in the resource department (particularly time and people).
I am, as I've posted, getting trunk and (hopefully) aurora nightlies
done consistently. Then I'm doing the l10n repacks (nightly).
Once that can be consistently done, I'm going to do the release
when I have the necessary information.
I realize it's not the kind of update you're looking for, but those
are the steps that I need to do in order to get updates to release.
Thank you for everyone's patience.
Edmund
Edmund,
Thank you for all your hard work updating SeaMonkey. All your hard work
(and all the other devs) is very much appreciated. I am willing to wait
for SeaMonkey to be updated. Many thanks for all the hard work.
Maybe the time has come to reconsider how often SeaMonkey needs to be
updated. 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?
I think most - but not all - Seamonkey users have no problems with the
features coming a bit later, as long as the security holes are fixed.
Let the Firefox/Thunderbird users beta-test new features for us.
The problem is that it is difficult to have one without the other. The
security patches are for a code base which includes the new features -
hell - a large proportion of the security patches *are* for the new
features. Deliberately remaining a bit behind is a slippery slope.
It is unfortunate that the child (Firefox, Thunderbird) does not help
the parent a bit more with resources.
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
