Web page composer becoming unsupported?
Nelson Bolyard
built-in web page composer. It had been working, but it got broken
really badly. As far as I know, none of those bugs was ever fixed, and
eventually I stopped using the built-in web page composer because it was
just too painful with all those bugs.
Saturday morning (Pacific time), a whole bunch of those 3.5 year old bugs
got reassigned to nobody.
[Bug 266804] Regression: Images not published along with web page
[Bug 266807] Regression: Images not displayed in composer window
[Bug 266809] After publishing, composer forgets page's local file name
[Bug 266811] After publishing, composer forgets the "site name" to which
page was published
[Bug 266936] composer publisher doesn't create named subdirectory
[Bug 266939] composer publisher typically fails to upload more than 1 or 2
pictures, no diagnostics
[Bug 266942] Publishing dialog truncated (clipped) during publication
I could spent the time to show that they're all still problems, but is
there any point to doing so? Would anyone work on them if I did?
Does it make sense to keep shipping a broken composer in SM?
Should it just get ripped out?
Neil
>Would anyone work on them if I did?
>
>
Not that I know of, sadly.
--
Warning: May contain traces of nuts.
Simon Paquet
> I could spent the time to show that they're all still problems, but is
> there any point to doing so? Would anyone work on them if I did?
>
> Does it make sense to keep shipping a broken composer in SM?
> Should it just get ripped out?
Sadly, since the demise of Netscape back in 2003, no one really took
care of the composer code shipped with the suite. There was a lot of
talk by Daniel Glazman (still the module owner of Composer) about
re-integrating all his modifications from Nvu back into the mozilla
codebase, but since Daniel Glazman is mostly a man of words and not of
deeds, this never took place.
Therefore I don't think that there is really a point in re-confirming
those bugs, since nobody will take up the torch. And I would also
agree that there isn't much sense in shipping a bug-ridden composer
with SeaMonkey 2, especially given the fact that the composer has
fallen far behind the competition in the last few years and is not
nearly on the same quality level as the browser or mailnews components.
Simon
--
Calendar l10n coordinator
Calendar Website Maintainer: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar
Calendar developer blog: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar
laurie
Composer may have some bugs, but don't rip it out!
For me (and I expect many others) it is a very effective WYSIWYG HTML
editor, and in fact the jewel of Seamonkey.
It would be nice though if it did not remove php tags.
Laurie
Philip Chee
> Sadly, since the demise of Netscape back in 2003, no one really took
> care of the composer code shipped with the suite. There was a lot of
> talk by Daniel Glazman (still the module owner of Composer) about
> re-integrating all his modifications from Nvu back into the mozilla
> codebase, but since Daniel Glazman is mostly a man of words and not of
> deeds, this never took place.
I think Daniel once said that it would take someone about six months to
port the improvements in Nvu back to the composer codebase. KaiRo, this
sounds like a Google Summer of Code project, doesn't it?
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]What can you do at 3 AM? Psssttt - got a modem??
* TagZilla 0.066.6
Simon Paquet
>> Sadly, since the demise of Netscape back in 2003, no one really took
>> care of the composer code shipped with the suite. There was a lot of
>> talk by Daniel Glazman (still the module owner of Composer) about
>> re-integrating all his modifications from Nvu back into the mozilla
>> codebase, but since Daniel Glazman is mostly a man of words and not
>> of deeds, this never took place.
>
> I think Daniel once said that it would take someone about six months
> to port the improvements in Nvu back to the composer codebase. KaiRo,
> this sounds like a Google Summer of Code project, doesn't it?
Well, that statement surely originated a few years ago. Nvu was
developed
on the Mozilla 1.7 branch. We have seen three major code revisions since
then (Mozilla 1.8.0 branch, Mozilla 1.8 branch, Mozilla 1.9 branch).
Therefore every day it gets harder and harder to this.
David E. Ross
> Philip Chee wrote on 09. Jun 2008:
>
>>> Sadly, since the demise of Netscape back in 2003, no one really took
>>> care of the composer code shipped with the suite. There was a lot of
>>> talk by Daniel Glazman (still the module owner of Composer) about
>>> re-integrating all his modifications from Nvu back into the mozilla
>>> codebase, but since Daniel Glazman is mostly a man of words and not
>>> of deeds, this never took place.
>> I think Daniel once said that it would take someone about six months
>> to port the improvements in Nvu back to the composer codebase. KaiRo,
>> this sounds like a Google Summer of Code project, doesn't it?
>
> Well, that statement surely originated a few years ago. Nvu was
> developed
> on the Mozilla 1.7 branch. We have seen three major code revisions since
> then (Mozilla 1.8.0 branch, Mozilla 1.8 branch, Mozilla 1.9 branch).
>
> Therefore every day it gets harder and harder to this.
>
> Simon
>
>
I read about two months ago that Nvu is no longer being maintained.
--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>
Go to Mozdev at <http://www.mozdev.org/> for quick access to
extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other
Mozilla-related applications. You can access Mozdev much
more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons.
pascal
> On 6/9/2008 5:07 AM, Simon Paquet wrote:
>> Philip Chee wrote on 09. Jun 2008:
>>
>>>> Sadly, since the demise of Netscape back in 2003, no one really took
>>>> care of the composer code shipped with the suite. There was a lot of
>>>> talk by Daniel Glazman (still the module owner of Composer) about
>>>> re-integrating all his modifications from Nvu back into the mozilla
>>>> codebase, but since Daniel Glazman is mostly a man of words and not
>>>> of deeds, this never took place.
>>> I think Daniel once said that it would take someone about six months
>>> to port the improvements in Nvu back to the composer codebase. KaiRo,
>>> this sounds like a Google Summer of Code project, doesn't it?
>> Well, that statement surely originated a few years ago. Nvu was
>> developed
>> on the Mozilla 1.7 branch. We have seen three major code revisions since
>> then (Mozilla 1.8.0 branch, Mozilla 1.8 branch, Mozilla 1.9 branch).
>>
>> Therefore every day it gets harder and harder to this.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>
> I read about two months ago that Nvu is no longer being maintained.
>
There is a fork of Nvu that is still being maintained:
Pascal
Robert Kaiser
> And I would also
> agree that there isn't much sense in shipping a bug-ridden composer
> with SeaMonkey 2, especially given the fact that the composer has
> fallen far behind the competition in the last few years and is not
> nearly on the same quality level as the browser or mailnews components.
The huge problem with that is that more and more people turn to being
SeaMonkey 1.1.x users just because of Composer, and I even know of new
"creating web pages" books being written that ship SeaMonkey on the book
CD and explain how to do stuff with Composer...
I'd be very very happy if someone would pick up at least some work on
Composer, there's a lot of stuff that could be done there!
Robert Kaiser
Steve Wendt
> One alternative that I could see, would be to build the composer
> front-end code (and all the parts of the backend that you do need for
> mailnews), package it as an extension and offer it on AMO.
That bug has been around since 2000:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29838
Neil
> One alternative that I could see, would be to build the composer
> front-end code (and all the parts of the backend that you do need for
> mailnews), package it as an extension and offer it on AMO. You could
> even offer a dialogue directly in the app, offering to install the
> composer addon, once people click on the composer icon for the first time.
The composer front-end code consists of one file, editor.xul - nearly
everything else is shared with, or at least coded in files used by,
message compose. On the other hand I believe NVu/Komposer have
additional features unrelated to mail, such as CasCadeS; which may still
be feasible as a SeaMonkey 2.0 extension
The real back-end, Midas, is of course shared with Firefox and so does
get at least some love, or as Paul Daniels would say, "Maybe, but not a
lot!"
David E. Ross
Then "Kompozer" should be substituted for "Nvu" in this discussion. And
perhaps Komposer should be substituted for Composer in the SeaMonkey
suite.
Robert Kaiser
> The problem is just, that nobody really cares about this part of
> SeaMonkey anymore since the demise of Netscape four years ago.
That's a wrong impression. If you mean that Composer in terms of the
thin layer of stuff that is solely needed for that SeaMonkey component
is not being actively developed, then I have to agree. But there's a bug
difference between "it's not being actively developed" and "nobody
cares", with "it's not being maintained" probably somewhere in between.
The fact is that Neil has been fixing a number of issues with Composer
when it turned out actually breaking due to core or other changes. We
also have a revamped icon set and a migrated main pref panel for it in
current trunk code. So telling that "nobody cares" or even that it would
be completely unmaintained would be wrong.
What's true is that nobody does actively develop the part that is
specific to the HTML editor component of SeaMonkey at the moment, and it
has been that way for some time. The huge parts that are shared by
mailcompose, even Midas or (yes!) XUL/HTML text fields are surely more
strongly owned and developed.
I won't hide the fact that we need some work there, and there are surely
a number of bugs out there that show this pretty well, but the situation
is not actually as grim as you describe it.
Robert Kaiser
Ricardo Palomares Martinez
Pascal, are you sure that KompoZer is still being maintained? I
haven't seen new versions of KompoZer for some months now and the last
write transactions on Sourceforge.net SVN took place in Oct. 2007.
Of course, despite this KompoZer 0.7.10 is way better than Nvu 1.0 and
a LOT better than SeaMonkey's built-in Composer. Even so, Composer is
handy for simple and quick things and I'd say it does more benefit
than harm to SeaMonkey.
Ricardo
--
If it's true that we are here to help others,
then what exactly are the OTHERS here for?
Philip Chee
> pascal escribió:
>> There is a fork of Nvu that is still being maintained:
>>
>> http://www.kompozer.net/
>
> Pascal, are you sure that KompoZer is still being maintained? I
> haven't seen new versions of KompoZer for some months now and the last
> write transactions on Sourceforge.net SVN took place in Oct. 2007.
>
> Of course, despite this KompoZer 0.7.10 is way better than Nvu 1.0 and
> a LOT better than SeaMonkey's built-in Composer. Even so, Composer is
> handy for simple and quick things and I'd say it does more benefit
> than harm to SeaMonkey.
As far as I know KompoZer exists solely to fix existing bugs in Nvu and
there isn't actually any new "development" as in features or enhancements.
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]"If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair color."
* TagZilla 0.066.6
David E. Ross
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:54:07 +0200, Ricardo Palomares Martinez wrote:
>> pascal escribió:
>>> There is a fork of Nvu that is still being maintained:
>>>
>>> http://www.kompozer.net/
>> Pascal, are you sure that KompoZer is still being maintained? I
>> haven't seen new versions of KompoZer for some months now and the last
>> write transactions on Sourceforge.net SVN took place in Oct. 2007.
>>
>> Of course, despite this KompoZer 0.7.10 is way better than Nvu 1.0 and
>> a LOT better than SeaMonkey's built-in Composer. Even so, Composer is
>> handy for simple and quick things and I'd say it does more benefit
>> than harm to SeaMonkey.
>
> As far as I know KompoZer exists solely to fix existing bugs in Nvu and
> there isn't actually any new "development" as in features or enhancements.
>
> Phil
>
That's not a bad thing. In various Mozilla products, too much effort is
being applied to enhancements and too little effort is applied to fixing
existing bugs.
pascal
> pascal escribió:
>> There is a fork of Nvu that is still being maintained:
>>
>> http://www.kompozer.net/
>
>
> Pascal, are you sure that KompoZer is still being maintained? I
> haven't seen new versions of KompoZer for some months now and the last
> write transactions on Sourceforge.net SVN took place in Oct. 2007.
>
> Of course, despite this KompoZer 0.7.10 is way better than Nvu 1.0 and
> a LOT better than SeaMonkey's built-in Composer. Even so, Composer is
> handy for simple and quick things and I'd say it does more benefit
> than harm to SeaMonkey.
>
> Ricardo
>
Yes, I am sure because i know the developer, but he does it for leisure
so he only codes on Kompozer during summer.
Pascal
pascal
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:54:07 +0200, Ricardo Palomares Martinez wrote:
>> pascal escribió:
>>> There is a fork of Nvu that is still being maintained:
>>>
>>> http://www.kompozer.net/
>> Pascal, are you sure that KompoZer is still being maintained? I
>> haven't seen new versions of KompoZer for some months now and the last
>> write transactions on Sourceforge.net SVN took place in Oct. 2007.
>>
>> Of course, despite this KompoZer 0.7.10 is way better than Nvu 1.0 and
>> a LOT better than SeaMonkey's built-in Composer. Even so, Composer is
>> handy for simple and quick things and I'd say it does more benefit
>> than harm to SeaMonkey.
>
> As far as I know KompoZer exists solely to fix existing bugs in Nvu and
> there isn't actually any new "development" as in features or enhancements.
>
> Phil
>
you should talk to Kazé :)
Pascal
Robert Kaiser
> Yes, I am sure because i know the developer, but he does it for leisure
> so he only codes on Kompozer during summer.
Well, if he'd contribute back the work done on this standalone product
to SeaMonkey 2, it might help both sides to have a product based on
current platform code ;-)
Robert Kaiser
ronh
wrote:
As far as I can see there is one aspect of Composer which is not
available in Kompozer is layer support - now if someone would develop
proper layer support in kompozer then I would no longer use
Dreamweaver.
Ron