SeaMonkey 1.0.1
Robert Kaiser
We're on our way to release the SeaMonkey 1.0.1 shortly, based on Gecko
1.8.0.2 (same backend as Firefox 1.5.0.2).
This is a security release, a list of fixed advisories will be available
at the web pages of the Mozilla security team, thanks to Dan Veditz, and
will be linked from the release notes.
We still want to take two fixes for the release, which fix the following
two bugs:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330053
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330168
Additionally, we still need to bump the version number to 1.0.1 before
we can tag and release it.
Despite those small fixes still missing, we'd like everyone to test the
current files in
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/contrib/latest-mozilla1.8.0/
(use only builds dated March 15 or later)
As there have been no major changes there since the 1.0 release, we
expect to trouble with the builds but still would like to see if any
unexpected problems arise.
Robert Kaiser
Neil
> We still want to take two fixes for the release, which fix the
> following two bugs:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330053
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330168
"We"?
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328932
--
Warning: May contain traces of nuts.
Robert Kaiser
> "We"?
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328932
This has approval1.8.0.2- but we still want to ship based on 1.8.0.2
(and before the tree opens for 1.8.0.3), so I vbelieve this one can't
make it and will need to get pushed out to SeaMonkey 1.0.2
Robert Kaiser
JoeS
First look, no major changes huh ?
This build behaves like a whole new product for me.
My interests are scripts and DHTML animations in newgroups. From my
perspective this is a whole new ballgame. This build rocks. Image
motions are much smoother, no jerkiness or hesitations. Mouse positions
does not affect animations. I'm really excited about how this build
performs. I could do some benchmarks, but the performance increase is
obvious. I like it, I like it, I like it.
Joe
Boris Zbarsky
> First look, no major changes huh ?
> This build behaves like a whole new product for me.
Compared to what other build?
-Boris
JoeS
original seamonkey release, seamonkey current trunk, Thunderbird current
trunk, CPU optimized builds from third parties, etc etc.
I hope it's not a quirk in my system.
Using WINXP PRO SP2+
Joe
Rich Gray
> Hi all,
>
> We're on our way to release the SeaMonkey 1.0.1 shortly, based on Gecko
> 1.8.0.2 (same backend as Firefox 1.5.0.2).
> Despite those small fixes still missing, we'd like everyone to test the
> current files in
> ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/contrib/latest-mozilla1.8.0/
>
> (use only builds dated March 15 or later)
No Mac... (Posted to prevent someone else from not noticing the
date on the .dmg file and doing a useless update...)
Rich
--
SeaMonkey - Surfing the net has never been so suite!
Boris Zbarsky
> Compared to anything else I have on my system, which includes the
> original seamonkey release, seamonkey current trunk, Thunderbird current
> trunk, CPU optimized builds from third parties, etc etc.
Huh. That's really weird. ;)
-Boris
JoeS
http://www.24fun.com/downloadcenter/benchjs/benchjs.html
tests 1 and 2 consistently run faster, but not really significantly.
Dunno, maybe it's just caching effect with a fresh build.
I'll run with it for a while and see what happens.
Joe
Neil
> Neil schrieb:
>
>> "We"?
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328932
>
> This has approval1.8.0.2- but we still want to ship based on 1.8.0.2
> (and before the tree opens for 1.8.0.3)
How can you ship before the tree opens for 1.8.0.3 when you still have
three other suite-only patches to land?
Philip Chee
> Despite those small fixes still missing, we'd like everyone to test the
> current files in
> ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/contrib/latest-mozilla1.8.0/
> (use only builds dated March 15 or later)
Somewhat off topic, but I usually test my extensions against the Seamonkey
1.0 branch and the Seamonkey trunk. Is it worth tracking the Seamonkey 1.1
branch as well if said extensions work in the former branches.
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.
[ ]I'm spending a year dead for tax purposes.
* TagZilla 0.059
HJ
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 00:48:40 +0100, Robert Kaiser wrote:
>
>> Despite those small fixes still missing, we'd like everyone to test the
>> current files in
>> ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/contrib/latest-mozilla1.8.0/
>> (use only builds dated March 15 or later)
>
> Somewhat off topic, but I usually test my extensions against the Seamonkey
> 1.0 branch and the Seamonkey trunk. Is it worth tracking the Seamonkey 1.1
> branch as well if said extensions work in the former branches.
Event handling and the template builder have changed quite a bit, so I
guess the answer can only be yes.
/HJ
Neil
>Somewhat off topic, but I usually test my extensions against the Seamonkey 1.0 branch and the Seamonkey trunk. Is it worth tracking the Seamonkey 1.1 branch as well if said extensions work in the former branches.
>
Well, I guess 1.1 will have some of the UI changes and even some of the
backend changes that have already landed on the trunk, so I don't
foresee any issues as yet, although at some time trunk will transition
to toolkit by which time you might have stopped supporting 1.0.x ;-)
Robert Kaiser
> Robert Kaiser wrote:
>
>> Neil schrieb:
>>
>>> "We"?
>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328932
>>
>> This has approval1.8.0.2- but we still want to ship based on 1.8.0.2
>> (and before the tree opens for 1.8.0.3)
>
> How can you ship before the tree opens for 1.8.0.3 when you still have
> three other suite-only patches to land?
It looks very likely that we can check in our remaining two fixes (plus
the version change) still before 1.8.0.2 final gets released.
Robert Kaiser
Neil
> Neil schrieb:
>
>> How can you ship before the tree opens for 1.8.0.3 when you still
>> have three other suite-only patches to land?
>
> It looks very likely that we can check in our remaining two fixes
> (plus the version change) still before 1.8.0.2 final gets released.
What does that actually mean?
Robert Kaiser
> Robert Kaiser wrote:
>> (plus the version change) still before 1.8.0.2 final gets released.
>
> What does that actually mean?
There's only an RC1 getting tagged right now, and that code will go
through QA before they'll release 1.8.0.2 (and FF 1.5.0.2)
And it looks like drivers will allow us to check in our
SeaMonkey-spcific tweaks while the tree is still frozen/closed for
1.8.0.2, so that we can release SeaMonkey 1.0.1 from that base, even
before the tree opens for 1.8.0.3 development.
Robert Kaiser
Philip Chee
HaHa. I still have Flashblock users who are apparently wedded to their
Mozilla Suite 1.7.2 and look with deep suspicion at this newfangled thing
called "Seamonkey".
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.
[ ]The irony of life is that no one gets out alive
* TagZilla 0.059
HJ
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:55:05 +0000, Neil wrote:
>> Philip Chee wrote:
>
>>> Somewhat off topic, but I usually test my extensions against the
>>> Seamonkey 1.0 branch and the Seamonkey trunk. Is it worth tracking
>>> the Seamonkey 1.1 branch as well if said extensions work in the former
>>> branches.
>
>> Well, I guess 1.1 will have some of the UI changes and even some of the
>> backend changes that have already landed on the trunk, so I don't
>> foresee any issues as yet, although at some time trunk will transition
>> to toolkit by which time you might have stopped supporting 1.0.x ;-)
>
> HaHa. I still have Flashblock users who are apparently wedded to their
> Mozilla Suite 1.7.2 and look with deep suspicion at this newfangled thing
> called "Seamonkey".
I had the same kind of problem, but I no longer support Mozilla and that
changed a lot.
/HJ
Neil
> it looks like drivers will allow us to check in our SeaMonkey-spcific
> tweaks while the tree is still frozen/closed for 1.8.0.2
Thus allowing me to check in bug 328932, so now I'm happy :-)
Christian Biesinger
> Event handling and the template builder have changed quite a bit, so I
> guess the answer can only be yes.
Wasn't that trunk only, so for 1.5 rather than 1.1?
Robert Kaiser
> Robert Kaiser wrote:
>
>> it looks like drivers will allow us to check in our SeaMonkey-spcific
>> tweaks while the tree is still frozen/closed for 1.8.0.2
>
> Thus allowing me to check in bug 328932, so now I'm happy :-)
Is this SeaMonkey-only?
We'll see under what conditions they'll allow our checkins...
Robert Kaiser
Neil
> Neil schrieb:
>
>> Robert Kaiser wrote:
>>
>>> it looks like drivers will allow us to check in our
>>> SeaMonkey-spcific tweaks while the tree is still frozen/closed for
>>> 1.8.0.2
>>
>> Thus allowing me to check in bug 328932, so now I'm happy :-)
>
> Is this SeaMonkey-only?
My checkin was; someone ported the fix to Firefox (but not in time for
1.5.0.2, so watch out developers!)
Robert Kaiser
> We still want to take two fixes for the release, which fix the following
> two bugs:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330053
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330168
Umm, I just realized I posted the wrong bug number. The first of those
should be https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=329959
Robert Kaiser
Robert Kaiser
> Umm, I just realized I posted the wrong bug number. The first of those
> should be https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=329959
And BTW, once that one has landed and we've changed the version, we
basically should be ready to go, the two other open fixes have already
been checked in:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330168
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328932
This means, once that last fix and the version changes are in, we should
do some heavy QA on the candidate builds, so that we're ready to release
along with FF and TBm which are targeted for a release on April 11th.
Robert Kaiser
Ricardo Palomares Martinez
>
> This means, once that last fix and the version changes are in, we should
> do some heavy QA on the candidate builds, so that we're ready to release
> along with FF and TBm which are targeted for a release on April 11th.
>
It's a bit off-topic here, but anyway...
Robert, could we the translators download one of the candidate builds,
review and prepare the langpacks for 1.0.1 and be confident that no
further changes will render those langpacks unusable or inaccurate for
SM 1.0.1 final?
TIA
--
If it's true that we are here to help others,
then what exactly are the OTHERS here for?
Robert Kaiser
> Robert, could we the translators download one of the candidate builds,
> review and prepare the langpacks for 1.0.1 and be confident that no
> further changes will render those langpacks unusable or inaccurate for
> SM 1.0.1 final?
Yes, all build that have the "1.0.1" in their name should be fine
(should get available within less than a day, the first ones get started
around midnight PST).
Though, actually, all 1.0 language packs should work fine with 1.0.1 as
well, as we don't allow string changes in 1.0.x
Robert Kaiser
Robert Kaiser
> Despite those small fixes still missing, we'd like everyone to test the
> current files in
> ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/nightly/contrib/latest-mozilla1.8.0/
All changes we wanted to fix for this release should be done now, all
files popping up in the above-mentioned directory with a 1.0.1 version
number should be considered candidate builds for a release - even if we
still have some time until that will really happen.
Please, test the hell out of those builds, do smoketests and report all
eventual regressions!
Thanks a lot!
In hope of a good 1.0.1 release (still targeted April 11 along with
Firefox and Thunderbird's 1.5.0.2 releases),
Robert Kaiser
Johannes Kastl
> Please, test the hell out of those builds, do smoketests and report all
> eventual regressions!
Ay Ay, Sir.
> In hope of a good 1.0.1 release (still targeted April 11 along with
> Firefox and Thunderbird's 1.5.0.2 releases),
ACK.
OJ
--
Programming is like sex: if you make a mistake, you have to support it
for the rest of your life.
(unknown)
DooShan
I see this red error at the bottom of SeaMonkey window:
<menuitem id="menu_HelpPopup_reportertoolmenu"
----^
Javascript console says:
Error: undefined entity
Source File: chrome://reporter/content/reporterOverlay.xul
Line: 55, Column: 5
Source Code:
<menuitem id="menu_HelpPopup_reportertoolmenu" ----^
Is this a known problem? I have Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1;
cs-CZ; rv:1.8.0.2) Gecko/20060322 SeaMonkey/1.0.1
Regards,
DooShan
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-seamonkey mailing list
> dev-apps-...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-seamonkey
Johannes Kastl
> Is this a known problem? I have Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1;
> cs-CZ; rv:1.8.0.2) Gecko/20060322 SeaMonkey/1.0.1
you should ask this in m.s.seamonkey, this is the developers newsgroup.
Apart from that: Yes, its a known problem (at least to me).
Can be solved by installing (or re-installing) your language pack, or
the langus.xpi/regus.xpi.
At least that worked for me.
OJ
--
Love ist like Pi: Natural, irrational and very important.
(unknown)
Andrew Schultz
> What tag should I check out now to make such a build for OS/2? Does
> SEAMONKEY_1_0_1_RELEASE already have all the necessary bits or should I
> take MOZILLA_1_8_0_BRANCH of a particular date instead?
SEAMONKEY_1_0_1_RELEASE should work.
--
Andrew Schultz
ajsc...@verizon.net
http://www.sens.buffalo.edu/~ajs42/