SeaMonkey 2.2 Beta 1 Release -- Introduces New Features
Justin Wood (Callek)
languages and makes a list of new functionality available to a wider
testing audience for the first time. Please note that this pre-release
version is still intended for testers only and might still show some
problems in everyday use. As always, we appreciate any feedback you may
have and encourage users to help us by filing bugs.
This version is built on top of Gecko 5 and features the following new
improvements:
CSS Animations [2] are now supported.
Improved canvas, JavaScript, memory, and networking performance.
Improved standards support for HTML5, XHR, MathML, SMIL, and canvas.
Improved spell checking for some locales.
WebGL content can no longer load cross-domain textures. [3]
Background tabs have setTimeout and setInterval clamped to 1000ms
to improve performance. [4]
The changes page [5] lists a more detailed overview of new features and
fixes relative to our last stable release, SeaMonkey 2.1. [6]
We welcome any and all discussions on this beta on our newsgroups, or
you can even file a bug if you find one. Be sure to check our Known
Issues prior to filing bugs.
SeaMonkey 2.2 Beta 1 is available for free download on the SeaMonkey
website. Once you have downloaded and installed this release, we'd like
to encourage you to get involved in discussing and reporting problems as
well as further improving the product.
Thanks for testing and helping us to make SeaMonkey even better!
Links:
[1] - http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/2.2b1
[2] - https://developer.mozilla.org/en/CSS/CSS_animations
[3] -
http://hacks.mozilla.org/2011/06/cross-domain-webgl-textures-disabled-in-firefox-5/
[4] - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=633421
[5] - http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.2/changes
[6] - http://www.seamonkey-project.org/releases/seamonkey2.1/
--
~Justin Wood (Callek)
(If I forgot any helpful links, sorry, will correct in replies to
m.d.a.seamonkey)
Stanimir Stamenkov
> We welcome any and all discussions on this beta on our newsgroups,
> or you can even file a bug if you find one. Be sure to check our
> Known Issues prior to filing bugs.
I wonder how is the list of known issues compiled, i.e. what issues
are considered for inclusion in it? For example, the recently
opened Bug 665313 "Opening message attachment does not work"
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=665313> doesn't appear
included.
--
Stanimir
PhillipJones
I'm sticking with 2.0.x and I I'll be sticking with 3.6.x in FF. Too
much that doesn't work in 2.1 4 and 5. I have downloaded FF 5 and
tried it even fewer extensions work.
There was in interesting article on ComputerWorld about the Rapid
release policies. What was more telling was the comments from people in
the comments section . Many business people seems They are going to deep
six FireFox two many plugins don't work.
The comments link is in real fine print. Seems like the user base is
going down to this rapid release situation. Not giving time for
extension developers to catch up without having to rewrite from scratch
all over again.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
Jens Hatlak
> I wonder how is the list of known issues compiled, i.e. what issues are
> considered for inclusion in it? For example, the recently opened Bug
> 665313 "Opening message attachment does not work"
> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=665313> doesn't appear
> included.
Missed that one since I was busy at work, preparing the website for
2.2b1, getting more fixes into 2.2 final *and* helping fix that very
bug. Added it now.
That said, you can help making sure it's not missed by setting the
"relnote" keyword if it becomes clear that a certain major bug will miss
the current/next stable release.
HTH
Jens
--
Jens Hatlak <http://jens.hatlak.de/>
SeaMonkey Trunk Tracker <http://smtt.blogspot.com/>
Stanimir Stamenkov
> Stanimir Stamenkov wrote:
>
>> For example, the recently opened Bug
>> 665313 "Opening message attachment does not work"
>> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=665313> doesn't appear
>> included.
>
> Missed that one since I was busy at work, preparing the website for
> 2.2b1, getting more fixes into 2.2 final *and* helping fix that very
> bug. Added it now.
>
> That said, you can help making sure it's not missed by setting the
> "relnote" keyword if it becomes clear that a certain major bug will
> miss the current/next stable release.
Thanks. I'll try to be more helpful next time.
--
Stanimir
Sven Grull
> SeaMonkey 2.2 Beta 1 is available for free download on the SeaMonkey
> website.
Will there be official supported Linux 64 bit builds for releases in the
near future?
For nighlies and tinderbox builds there are already automated builds for
Linux 64 bit. Only releases are still missing. There are only
contributed builds available.
Sven
Justin Wood (Callek)
No[t yet].
The Release builds of Linux64 are created *by us* but until we can have
a regular run of testing done on these, we can't officially endorse them
as quality builds, thus our releasing as contrib for now, sorry.
--
~Justin Wood (Callek)
Philipp van Hüllen
> We welcome any and all discussions on this beta on our newsgroups, or
> you can even file a bug if you find one. Be sure to check our Known
> Issues prior to filing bugs.
How's the upgrade/downgrade path with SM2.1?
I.e. are there any (incompatible) changes to the profile?
Just in case, I'd get annoyed enough to fall back.
BR/Philipp
Sven Grull
>> For nighlies and tinderbox builds there are already automated builds for
>> Linux 64 bit. Only releases are still missing. There are only
>> contributed builds available.
>
> No[t yet].
>
> The Release builds of Linux64 are created *by us* but until we can have
> a regular run of testing done on these, we can't officially endorse them
> as quality builds, thus our releasing as contrib for now, sorry.
And as long as there are no official supported builds of Linux64 there
is no possibility to create mar update snippets?
Sven
Justin Wood (Callek)
I think there *should* be a way to do that, and it is wanted by me at least.
I'd rather update users from an old security-hole build to a new
fixed-build, even if BOTH builds are unsupported officially.
That said, I don't see an easy way in automation terms to do that [yet].
--
~Justin Wood (Callek)
Jens Hatlak
> How's the upgrade/downgrade path with SM2.1?
> I.e. are there any (incompatible) changes to the profile?
Not that I am aware of. Think of it as SM 2.1.1 (with the only
difference that more platform changes happened and some add-ons might
not advertise compatibility with 2.2 yet).
Sven Grull
>> And as long as there are no official supported builds of Linux64 there
>> is no possibility to create mar update snippets?
>
> I think there *should* be a way to do that, and it is wanted by me at least.
>
> I'd rather update users from an old security-hole build to a new
> fixed-build, even if BOTH builds are unsupported officially.
>
> That said, I don't see an easy way in automation terms to do that [yet].
That this does not get lost I filed bug 666573.
Sven
Tony Mechelynck
> Philipp van Hüllen wrote:
>> How's the upgrade/downgrade path with SM2.1?
>> I.e. are there any (incompatible) changes to the profile?
>
> Not that I am aware of. Think of it as SM 2.1.1 (with the only
> difference that more platform changes happened and some add-ons might
> not advertise compatibility with 2.2 yet).
>
> HTH
>
> Jens
>
Now and then, not necessarily coincident with a release, there is a
schema change in one or another of the sqlite databases (e.g.
places.sqlite = bookmarks & history ; extensions.sqlite = addons ; etc.)
AFAIK these changes are never made known to the public; the only way to
know about them (unless you're one of the developers responsible for the
schema change) is by downgrading over a schema change to find that one
or more of your sqlite databases has been renamed with a .corrupt
postfix (e.g. suddently your previous extensions.sqlite has been renamed
extensions.sqlite.corrupt and a new extensions.sqlite has been created,
possibly enabling all user-disabled extensions in the process...). Even
SeaMonkey developers may quite possibly be unaware of schema changes
introduced by Toolkit developers.
The only more or less user-facing info about the above is that "it is
never recommended to go back and forth between versions on a single
profile: if you do that, your application may fail in strange and
unsupported ways".
Best regards,
Tony.
--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
117. You are more comfortable typing in html.
Stanimir Stamenkov
>
>> I wonder how is the list of known issues compiled, i.e. what issues are
>> considered for inclusion in it? For example, the recently opened Bug
>> 665313 "Opening message attachment does not work"
>> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=665313> doesn't appear
>> included.
>
> Missed that one since I was busy at work, preparing the website for
> 2.2b1, getting more fixes into 2.2 final *and* helping fix that very
> bug. Added it now.
I hope the fix will get into the 2.2 final. At least that's what
the Bugzilla entry states and I see it is no longer in the "Known
Issues" for 2.2. It has initially missed Beta 2, but now I don't
see it included in Beta 3, either.
--
Stanimir
Justin Wood (Callek)
Ugh yea, if it missed beta3 it was a mistake in setting up/doing the
tagging for this, and it means that build1 of the final missed it too
Can you nominate for tracking 2.2 and I'll address/look tomorrow,
probably yanking it in with a respin. (Which means 2.2 final may well be
delayed an extra day, but that was a PITA enough bug to want me to take it)
--
~Justin Wood (Callek)
Stanimir Stamenkov
> On 7/3/2011 8:27 AM, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote:
>
>>
>> I hope the fix will get into the 2.2 final. At least that's what the
>> Bugzilla entry states and I see it is no longer in the "Known Issues"
>> for 2.2. It has initially missed Beta 2, but now I don't see it
>> included in Beta 3, either.
>
> Ugh yea, if it missed beta3 it was a mistake in setting up/doing the
> tagging for this, and it means that build1 of the final missed it too
Yes, appears it's not in build1 final:
http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/comm-release/graph/7842
> Can you nominate for tracking 2.2 and I'll address/look tomorrow,
> probably yanking it in with a respin. (Which means 2.2 final may
> well be delayed an extra day, but that was a PITA enough bug to want
> me to take it)
Should I do something to nominate this for tracking 2.2, or it means
I need to just keep an eye on it?
--
Stanimir
Philip Chee
I did ask IanN about it in
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=665313#c22>
But he assured me that it would make b3 so I didn't bother following up
further.
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.
Justin Wood (Callek)
Well when you are logged into bugzilla there is a flag on the right side
of the bug page that you could have toggled, since I am fully awake I am
now tracking this myself anyway.
You actually have no idea how much headaches you saved me by mentioning
this! :-)
I also noticed that I accidentally missed the turn-on for nb-NO l10n at
the same time.
I'll be spinning the build2 of 2.2 today, moving the expected release
date to tomorrow.
--
~Justin Wood (Callek)
Justin Wood (Callek)
Yes, sadly that assurance I think was from me in IRC, but hard to
recall. Sadly due to a slight mistake in my process [which I have now
corrected] I missed it.
I hope to never have them again in the future.
--
~Justin Wood (Callek)