On 9/2/2018 11:51 AM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote:
>Do what you must but I would switch probably to Chromium then.
Part of why I am still on Mozilla products is I don't trust
Google/Chromium to not be harvesting my online activity to use to create
a profile of me and sell that information. While I realize it is a
mostly futile effort these days I do try to protect my privacy as best
as realistic. Google doesn't seem safe.
I am told there is a built without all the google data mining and
privacy invasion stuff but after an hour of searching I couldn't find a
Windows executable version. Any ideas where to get working builds
without the google privacy invasion components?
uBlock is really the better product nowadays.
> (which I only use for the increasing number of websites that won't
work in SM)
I don't see many breakages which are real. Most can be fixed with
setting the user agent. With most web sites still supporting IE 8 only a
few really break. Most are google ones and they do it in for Fx too.
> I wonder how soon we will realistically see a Seamonky build with the
Firefox 60 ESR or newer code. I really don't want to move away from SM,
but the lack
Maybe 6 months to a year. Firefox has problems of its own and becomes a
permanent construction camp so anything after 2.57 is off for now. Do
what you must but I would switch probably to Chromium then. The Fx ui
degrades with every release now so you can just use the original which
imho already looks cleaner than Fx.
Locally compiled 2.53 and 2.49.5 both work a champ for me so I don't
have any need to switch now. Newer web features will probably become a
problem in a year or two but seriously I don't want things like service
workers and wasm anyway. I really doubt this will do security any good.
FRG
Hawker wrote:
Thank you both for the clear explanation.
Sounds like I'm stuck where I am. A few of my ABP filters are now
saying "this filter subscriptions requires a newer ABP version...."
This is going to be a security risk soon I assume as I fund ABP does a
better job keeping add based virus out than my AV products.
Alas your comment "Most are a joke compared to their former xul based
ones." Is sadly true. Some of the extensions I see in my Firefox
install (which I only use for the increasing number of websites that
won't work in SM) have way more limited UIs than the XUL version. I'm
hoping with time they can reach the functionality of the old versions.
Is there something about how they work that means they never will?
And a few of my favorite extensions have not been ported.
I wonder how soon we will realistically see a Seamonky build with the
Firefox 60 ESR or newer code. I really don't want to move away from
SM, but the lack of developers to keep the code current is putting the
handwriting clearly on the wall for SM's demise.
On 8/30/2018 12:43 PM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote:
Thunderbird 60 and SeaMonkey 2.57 are/will not be based on 52 code
but on Firefox 60 ESR code.
Web extensions were never developed with a program like Thunderbird
in mind. TB now adds web extensions apis and support but I doubt they
will be able to make any of the current ad or script blockers work in
the near time.
If not for developer shortage this would be actually easier for
SeaMonkey which already has a browser in place. But the whole Firefox
implementation is a mess with parts in the browser frontend and parts
in the Gecko backend.
And for quantum architectural changes. Most was already in 56 and
starting with 57 it was just lets rip this and this and that and this
out.
It needs to be supported but besides from a few key extensions like
uBlock and NoScript you won't miss much with web extensions. Most are
a joke compared to their former xul based ones.
FRG
NFN Smith wrote:
Hawker wrote:
I have Adblock Plus 2.9.1 installed on Seamonkey. My subscriptions
are starting to say I need a newer version to work. I can't seem
find a SM compatible version of Adblock to download.
Is 2.9.1 (over 1 year old) the last version to work? Where can I
find newer versions?
I believe that 2.9.1 is the most recent version that will run in
Seamonkey, and I get the impression that that one isn't going to get
any more updates.
I know that I've also been running 2.9.1 in Thunderbird, and it
works fine in TB 52.x, but on the installation I have that I
upgraded to Thunderbird 60, Thunderbird disables it. In Thunderbird,
I believe that v60 is still 52.x code, but where essential updates
are being backported from Firefox ESR 60. Thus, Thunderbird still
supports XUL extensions, but for V60, extensions must be tweaked to
allow for explicit support of V60.
Realistically, until both Seamonkey and Thunderbird can finish the
move to WebExtensions, users of both are mostly going to limited to
extensions whose status is essentially frozen in time. There may be
a some developers who do stuff for Seamonkey or Thunderbird
explicitly that are continuing to update XUL extensions, but for
extensions that are primarily Firefox extensions, I think that most
of the developers are focusing only on what can be done in
WebExtensions. They won't pull the older XUL extensions (especially
now that those are being hosted at thunderbird.net, rather than
addons.mozilla.org, but don't plan on any additional updates.
Adblock Plus is certainly not the only one, but it's a good example.
Unfortunately, both Seamonkey and Thunderbird are still some way
away from transition to WebExtensions, and other architectural
changes that Firefox introduced with Quantum.
Smith
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
