Re: Pretty tab horkage on 29.0b1

Message has been deleted

WaltS48

unread,

Apr 23, 2014, 9:20:55 AM4/23/14

to

On 04/23/2014 09:07 AM, Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
> After installing 29.0b1, the tabs at the top are busted. Rather than
> displaying the nice curvy tabs, they are smaller and have squared
> corners.
>

Well they did pioneer the Australis theme. Maybe they are pioneering the
next Firefox theme. LOL!

My 31.0a1 still has curvy tabs.

Still squared and smaller in safe mode?

Mark Banner

unread,

Apr 23, 2014, 9:55:05 AM4/23/14

to

On 23/04/2014 14:07, Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
> After installing 29.0b1, the tabs at the top are busted. Rather than
> displaying the nice curvy tabs, they are smaller and have squared
> corners.

Exactly why you shouldn't be using builds before they are released on
www.mozilla.org. We haven't yet finished building these builds, let
alone start to test them.

That said, I happened to see this message and it is indeed broken, so
you've picked it up before we did so thanks for that.

Just remember, as you've shown, it is very risky testing these
unreleased builds as they may not even be complete.

Mark.

Message has been deleted

WaltS48

unread,

Apr 23, 2014, 11:40:24 AM4/23/14

to

> Mark,
>
> Yup, I know the risk involved with betas and it's why I don't mind
> beating up on them to see what I can break or find. If it's that bad,
> I usually just revert to the previous beta or stable version. I filed
> two bugs (1000179 & 1000193) for this and another issue I discovered.
>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP]
>

Looking at your attachment for bug 1000193, it appears to be the normal
behavior since maybe Daily 29.0a1.

It is that way in Daily 31.0a1. The fields turn white when you enter them.

Message has been deleted

WaltS48

unread,

Apr 23, 2014, 12:14:36 PM4/23/14

to

On 04/23/2014 11:48 AM, Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:

> Seems odd that in 28.0b1 it wasn't like that.

>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP]
>

Why? Different version without the bug fix that changed that behavior.

[960672 – Windows - Update Composer
UI](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=960672)

[867166 – (New_Composer_UI) [meta] Update Composer
UI](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=867166)

Message has been deleted

WaltS48

unread,

Apr 23, 2014, 12:24:33 PM4/23/14

to

> Wow, by design. I can't say I agree with the comments that it looks
> better. I guess I just prefer the old look to this.

>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP]
>

It takes some getting used to. :)

Wayne

unread,

Apr 23, 2014, 12:38:48 PM4/23/14

to

> Mark,
>
> Yup, I know the risk involved with betas and it's why I don't mind
> beating up on them to see what I can break or find. If it's that bad,
> I usually just revert to the previous beta or stable version. I filed
> two bugs (1000179 & 1000193) for this and another issue I discovered.
>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP]
>

I hope you don't miss Mark's point...which is that what you used can't
even be considered a beta - it was totally untested - and so the risks
you assumed are not those of a beta. It is possible for a build that
hasn't undergone testing to have something terribly awfully wrong with
it - something that could have caused you irreparable dataloss.

Message has been deleted

Chris Ilias

unread,

Apr 23, 2014, 7:27:17 PM4/23/14

to

On 2014-04-23, 11:15 AM, Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP] wrote:
>> Exactly why you shouldn't be using builds before they are released on
>> www.mozilla.org. We haven't yet finished building these builds, let
>> alone start to test them.
>>
>> That said, I happened to see this message and it is indeed broken, so
>> you've picked it up before we did so thanks for that.
>>
>> Just remember, as you've shown, it is very risky testing these
>> unreleased builds as they may not even be complete.
>

> Yup, I know the risk involved with betas and it's why I don't mind
> beating up on them to see what I can break or find.

It doesn't look like you understood Mark's message. It's not about the
risk of using betas. It's about that there is no "29.0b1". The latest
update on the beta channel is at 28. See
<http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/channel/>.

--
Chris Ilias <http://ilias.ca>
Mailing list/Newsgroup moderator

Message has been deleted

Wayne

unread,

Apr 24, 2014, 11:36:00 AM4/24/14

to

> Might want to check on the FTP server. There are 4 builds now.

>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP]
>

again, no, no, no.

no.

Wolf, please stop advertising these links to the public. 1. You do not
know whether these are officially released. 2. The mass users should be
getting their beta goodies via
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/channel/

Chris Ilias

unread,

Apr 24, 2014, 7:24:09 PM4/24/14

to

> Might want to check on the FTP server. There are 4 builds now.

That's what Mark meant by "...using builds before they are released on
www.mozilla.org."

For more info, read these blog posts:
<http://soberbuildengineer.com/blog/2006/10/the-anti-release/>
<http://beltzner.ca/mike/2006/10/23/its-not-like-were-ashamed/>
as well as the three I wrote on the subject years ago:
<http://ilias.ca/blog/2005/11/looking-at-ftp-sites-for-mozilla-releases/>
<http://ilias.ca/blog/2006/03/firefox-1502-has-not-been-released/>
<http://ilias.ca/blog/2006/04/looking-at-ftp-sites-for-mozilla-releases-part-ii/>

By reading those, you'll see that the issue is more about you thinking
the bits currently on the ftp server are the same ones used for the
release. If there are problems found with the builds on the FTP server,
they may have to be respun. In which case, what you're using is not the
same builds as the ones officially released. In fact, when Thunderbird
1.5.0.2 was being uploaded to FTP mirrors, that is what happened.