Lanikai Alpha 1 released
Rafael Ebron
is now available for download [1]. Lanikai is built on top of the Gecko
1.9.2 platform. While this alpha version is considered to be stable, it
is intended for developers and members of our testing community to use
for evaluation and feedback. Users of this latest alpha version of
Thunderbird should not expect all of their add-ons to work properly with
this milestone.
The main goals of this release is to find out about possible problems
caused by the changes in the underlying platform. Notable changes include:
* Several improvements to IMAP.
* Several fixes for Smart Folders, message filters, and attachment
handling.
* Several design improvements and corrections to the interface.
* Download Manager is now accessible as a menu item (Tools > Saved
Files).
* Stability and memory improvements.
For a more detailed list of bug fixes, see the full bug list [2].
Downloading
Please read the release notes [3] before downloading for more
information about this release including known issues [4].
Testers can download Lanikai Alpha 1 for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux.
Community chat about Lanikai can be followed at the Thunderbird 3.1 wiki
[5] and on irc.mozilla.org in #thunderbird.
[1]
http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/early_releases/downloads/
[2]
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced;resolution=FIXED;target_milestone=Thunderbird%203.1a1
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced;resolution=FIXED;target_milestone=Thunderbird%203.1a1>
[3] http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/3.1a1/releasenotes/
[4]
http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/3.1a1/releasenotes/#issues
ANONYMOUS
Jesus, I am still using old mozilla and you are now telling us that
"Lanikai Alpha 1" has recently been released. I better hurry and get
one soon then! Are all links in your message working as at today
(22:53:00 GMT)?
thank you.
Mike Easter
Rafael Ebron wrote:
> Lanikai Alpha 1, an early version of our next release of Thunderbird,
> is now available for download [1].
There is not one word of format=flowed bugs and regressions seen in
Tbird3 compared to Tbird2 in the 3.1a1 release notes
http://snipr.com/u9wrd Thu Feb 4 2010 15:27:04 PST Resolution: FIXED
Target Milestone: Thunderbird 3.1a1
Very very sad. The issues are being completely ignored.
--
Mike Easter
Floogle
<http://my.wisestamp.com/link?u=3xn9k7bhjprw6z99&site=www.wisestamp.com/email-install>
Frank
> posted to m.s.t only
>
> Rafael Ebron wrote:
> > Lanikai Alpha 1, an early version of our next release of Thunderbird,
> > is now available for download [1].
>
> There is not one word of format=flowed bugs and regressions seen in
> Target Milestone: Thunderbird 3.1a1
>
> Very very sad. The issues are being completely ignored.
>
> --
> Mike Easter
Looks like they addressing issues I've had but at this point I would
not touch it with a 10 ft. pole as it is for developers, one of which
I am not.
Looking forward to these fixes when OK for us non-guru's.
Lynn McGuire
According to
http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/early_releases/downloads/,
it is version 3.1a1.
Lynn
Lynn McGuire
According to
Mike Easter
User-Agent: G2/1.0
<extraneously added crossposted newsgroups deleted>
> Mike Easter
>> Very very sad. The issues are being completely ignored.
>>
>> --
>> Mike Easter
>
> Looks like they addressing issues I've had but at this point I would
> not touch it with a 10 ft. pole as it is for developers, one of which
> I am not.
> Looking forward to these fixes when OK for us non-guru's.
I see you are using GG googlegroups to post to a group which is carried
on a specialty/private nntp newsserver and also bottomposting in an
untrimmed fashion while doing so.
GG is a terrible way to read or post to a newsgroup whether to usenet
general or the moz newsserver's groups.
I suggest that you get a newsreader and subscribe to moz groups on the
moz newsserver with it; and in the meantime that you read GG help
articles ...
http://snipr.com/u9xah What's good 'netiquette' when posting to Usenet?
http://snipr.com/u9xao The full text of the previous message is
included in the composition box and marked with angle brackets (>) at
the start of each line.
... but GG doesn't teach you specifically how to trim in GG's editor to
prevent untrimmed bottom posting. That process is illustrated in this
article:
http://www.anta.net/misc/nnq/nquote.shtml This document is a description
of the traditionally accepted "quoting style" in Usenet newsgroup
postings. # Q2: How should I use the quoted text and arrange it with my
own text? - # Q3: Why shouldn't I quote the entire posting that I'm
responding to?
--
Mike Easter
Ron Hunter
important to you. Seems to me that blank space at the end of a line is
the same as spaces at the end of the line, unless you are trying to do
text columns using spaces instead of tabs.
--
Ron Hunter -- rphu...@charter.net
Carey
--
Steve
careystevens.blogspot.com
Frank
> Frank wrote:
>
> User-Agent: G2/1.0
>
> <extraneously added crossposted newsgroups deleted>
>
> > Mike Easter
> >> Very very sad. The issues are being completely ignored.
>
> >> --
> >> Mike Easter
>
> > Looks like they addressing issues I've had but at this point I would
> > not touch it with a 10 ft. pole as it is for developers, one of which
> > I am not.
> > Looking forward to these fixes when OK for us non-guru's.
>
> I see you are using GG googlegroups to post to a group which is carried
> on a specialty/private nntp newsserver and also bottomposting in an
> untrimmed fashion while doing so.
>
> GG is a terrible way to read or post to a newsgroup whether to usenet
> general or the moz newsserver's groups.
>
> I suggest that you get a newsreader and subscribe to moz groups on the
> moz newsserver with it; and in the meantime that you read GG help
> articles ...
>
> included in the composition box and marked with angle brackets (>) at
> the start of each line.
>
> ... but GG doesn't teach you specifically how to trim in GG's editor to
> prevent untrimmed bottom posting. That process is illustrated in this
> article:
>
> of the traditionally accepted "quoting style" in Usenet newsgroup
> postings. # Q2: How should I use the quoted text and arrange it with my
> own text? - # Q3: Why shouldn't I quote the entire posting that I'm
> responding to?
>
> --
> Mike Easter
This is a problem? I use TB for email and ng's but eternal-september
does not access this ng.
Mike Easter
> Mike Easter
>> I see you are using GG googlegroups
>> I suggest that you get a newsreader and subscribe to moz groups on the
>> moz newsserver with it;
> This is a problem? I use TB for email and ng's but eternal-september
> does not access this ng.
You can use tb with mulitple/alternative news accounts. Create a new
(another) news account in tb for which the name of the newsserver is
news.mozilla.org and its port 119, no SSL, no request authentication.
Then you can subscribe to this group on that newsserver.
When you reply to a message, before you type anything, begin your post
by trimming away every line of the citation/quote which has no 'new'
specific and necessary relevance to the words you are getting ready to
type, as I did above.
--
Mike Easter
Frank Logullo
Never been criticized about not clipping posts though. Most don't.
Mike Easter
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> trimming away every line of the citation/quote which has no 'new'
>> specific and necessary relevance to the words you are getting ready to
>> type,
> Thanks. That works in TB.
Goodjob. Much better than GGing.
> Never been criticized about not clipping posts though.
Bottom posting untrimmed is very very similar to top posting untrimmed;
even the top posters complain about untrimmed bottom posting and use it to
illustrate why they think top posting is 'better'. Both types of
untrimmed posts - top and bottom - lack the essential context which is so
meaningful and necessary in newsgroup communication.
> Most don't.
The best way to communicate what you want to say is by trimming almost all
of what you are citing.
--
Mike Easter
Ron Hunter
>>
>> When you reply to a message, before you type anything, begin your post
>> by trimming away every line of the citation/quote which has no 'new'
>> specific and necessary relevance to the words you are getting ready to
>> type, as I did above.
>>
>>
> Thanks. That works in TB.
> Never been criticized about not clipping posts though. Most don't.
TB3 makes trimming easy. Just highlight what you want to quote, and hit
'reply', as you see above. Unfortunately, some people end up trimming
too much, and the thread of information is lost. Excessive trimming is
much worse than no trimming.
Mike Easter
> Excessive trimming is
> much worse than no trimming.
Almost never. The entire contents of a thread in its totality are
available from the references of the thread's content, all of which are
available and accessible from information in the References line and the
newsserver when within the range of the newsserver's retention. In real
life, the vast majority of conversations are being conducted in 'real
time' within a very short time of each other.
The only few words of what was said before are those specific few which
give rise or impetus or 'launch' the words which are being said by the
poster who is citing a few words or a line of the previous message content.
Alternatively, if a conversation is being 'researched' from news message
archives, it is almost always referred to by using googlegroups links to
the conversation; which archive links provide access to every single
line of every single message which wasn't specifically and intentionally
restricted from being archived by the poster of the article.
--
Mike Easter
Mike Easter
<snip>
Regarding Ron's remarks about highlighting what is to be quoted and
hitting reply; one disadvantage of that strategy with the current
implementation of Tbird's f=f is that what is quoted/cited in that
manner will lose its trailing spaces, violating the RFC 3676 because of
a poor implementation even by the Tbird 2 f=f.
Re Ron's remarks about excessive trimming being worse than no trimming;
that is almost never the case. In actuality it is not even necessary
to quote/cite *anything* the previous poster said which is to be used
for context for one's next remarks /if/ the subsequent poster is willing
to type out a parapharase contextualization of what was said before.
So, in reality, there is no necessity to cite anything at all, if the
subsequent poster will summarize or provide context for the next
remarks, as is illustrated here.
--
Mike Easter
Ron Hunter
rather impractical.
I regard Googlegroups in about the same way as I regard Facebook. I
NEVER go there.
Mike Easter
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> The entire contents of a thread in its totality are
>> available from the references of the thread's content, all of which are
>> available and accessible from information in the References line and the
>> newsserver when within the range of the newsserver's retention. In real
>> life, the vast majority of conversations are being conducted in 'real
>> time' within a very short time of each other.
>> Alternatively, if a conversation is being 'researched' from news message
>> archives, it is almost always referred to by using googlegroups links to
>> the conversation; which archive links provide access to every single
>> line of every single message which wasn't specifically and intentionally
>> restricted from being archived by the poster of the article.
>>
>>
> For whatever reason, the links do NOT work here. That makes going back
> rather impractical.
What do you mean 'makes going back impractical'? Don't you know how to
access all of the messages on a newsserver?
You can have all of the messages retained on the moz server available in
your Tbird. That retention extends back to 2009 July.
> I regard Googlegroups in about the same way as I regard Facebook. I
> NEVER go there.
If you are trying to access messages which have spooled off the moz
server because of its retention limitations, you *have* to go to
someplace which has greater retention.
The newsserver which I have access to with the longest retention is
giganews which doesn't carry this group; nor does individual.
Googlegroups is an excellent place for retaining/archiving the messages
for the groups which it carries. It carries more messages for
mozilla.support.thunderbird than does the moz newsserver. GG carries
m.s.t back to 2008 Dec.
You are very silly or shortsighted to not use GG for searching
newsgroups for information. It is an excellent resource.
I never go to facebook. That is an entirely different subject. Facebook
is a social networking place. GG is an information resource asset.
Unfortunately it doesn't search as well as it used to.
--
Mike Easter
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
In any support group where an important support issue is being
discussed, excessive trimming is very much counterproductive and the
possibility of losing valued content is much greater than if you are
really careful in your trimming OR don't trim at all. Any reader
shouldn't have to jump through hoops to make attempts at retrieving
valued content, it should be there in its totality. General discussion
et al, on the other hand is a much different matter. 8-)
This issue can best be further discussed in m.general .. followup set to
.general
--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> Re Ron's remarks about excessive trimming being worse than no trimming;
> that is almost never the case. In actuality it is not even necessary
> to quote/cite *anything* the previous poster said which is to be used
> for context for one's next remarks /if/ the subsequent poster is willing
> to type out a parapharase contextualization of what was said before.
>
> So, in reality, there is no necessity to cite anything at all, if the
> subsequent poster will summarize or provide context for the next
> remarks, as is illustrated here.
Completely wrong insofar as support groups go! Quoting related text in
ANY support group is very important mainly for new readers coming into
the group that can grasp the entire subject/thread in one post, usually
the last reply. This is also true for those that mark as read and then
return to the group several posts/replies later. This, btw, has been the
rule on the Netscape Secure server since its inception in 1995 and still
continues today.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
If the hosting server's retention time is 60 days for example, there is
no way for "Google" to retrieve messages from within that 60 day period
UNLESS they are archiving those messages.
Mike Easter
> Mike Easter wrote:
>>>> Alternatively, if a conversation is being 'researched' from news message
>>>> archives, it is almost always referred to by using googlegroups links to
>>>> the conversation;
>> You can have all of the messages retained on the moz server available in
>> your Tbird. That retention extends back to 2009 July.
>> If you are trying to access messages which have spooled off the moz
>> server because of its retention limitations, you *have* to go to
>> someplace which has greater retention.
>> Googlegroups is an excellent place for retaining/archiving the messages
>> for the groups which it carries. It carries more messages for
>> mozilla.support.thunderbird than does the moz newsserver. GG carries
>> m.s.t back to 2008 Dec.
> If the hosting server's retention time is 60 days for example, there is
> no way for "Google" to retrieve messages from within that 60 day period
> UNLESS they are archiving those messages.
I don't know what you are trying to say here, but whatever it is, I'm
pretty sure you don't have it right. You seem to be saying that GG
doesn't have access to the messages which have spooled off moz's server.
When GG carries a newsgroup, whether it be the general usenet or the
groups carried on a specialty server such as moz, GG 'slurps' or
accesses the messages just like a normal nntp newsserver. Then, GG
retains or archives those messages it has slurped indefinitely, even
after the messages spool off the originating server, ie moz, because of
its shorter retention.
Consequently, in this case which shows the moz newsserver retaining
messages in this group back to 2009 May (I was mistaken when I said 2009
July), the messages are retained longer by GG, namely 2008 Dec.
Likely GG didn't start carrying this group until 2008 Dec, so I'm not
sure how one would go about accessing older messages which have spooled
off the moz server.
--
Mike Easter
Mike Easter
> If you are trying to access messages which have spooled off the moz
> server because of its retention limitations, you *have* to go to
> someplace which has greater retention.
Error there. There is *no* place with greater retention of these moz
messages than the moz giganews server.
--
Mike Easter
Mike Easter
>>> You can have all of the messages retained on the moz server available in
>>> your Tbird. That retention extends back to 2009 July.
> Consequently, in this case which shows the moz newsserver retaining
> messages in this group back to 2009 May (I was mistaken when I said 2009
> July), the messages are retained longer by GG, namely 2008 Dec.
I was mistaken in my assessment of the moz server retention because I
don't know how to use Tbird as well as I do OE to handle assessment of
the newsserver's retention.
OE shows me over 92000 messages in this group dating back to 2006 Jan 9
'Welcome to mozilla.support.thunderbird.' message.
--
Mike Easter
Joy Beeson
wrote:
> Excessive trimming is
> much worse than no trimming.
Hernando's Plea
Please trim, please trim, oh won't you trim?
Your posts would look much nicer slim!
Searching, searching is so grim!
Please trim, please trim, oh won't you trim,
Please Trim!
It's so ease-y don't you know
highlight, delete, away they go!
and leave your page as white as snow!
Please trim, please trim, oh won't you trim,
Please Trim!
Being buried in garb-age is so grim,
My odds of finding your message slim
while I drown in quotes from her and him,
Please trim, please trim, oh won't you trim,
Please Trim!
When fin'ly found, it makes no sense
Unless I guess to which sen-tence
You refer six paragraphs hence --
Please trim, please trim, oh won't you trim,
Please Trim!
----------------------------------------------------
It's perfectly acceptable to refrain from quoting anything at all --
as long as one writes a post that makes sense.
For example, instead of writing
| John said
|
| > You must clean your needles with fine steel wool.
|
| You must also wax them to keep them from rusting again.
You could write
| After cleaning your needles with fine steel wool,
| you must wax them to keep them from rusting again.
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
Ron Hunter
Nope.
Ken Whiton
*-* In Article <r5ednQqq5sH2lu3W...@mozilla.org>,
*-* Mike Easter wrote
*-* About Re: Lanikai Alpha 1 released
[ ... ]
> Googlegroups is an excellent place for retaining/archiving the
> messages for the groups which it carries. It carries more messages
> for mozilla.support.thunderbird than does the moz newsserver. GG
> carries m.s.t back to 2008 Dec.
I don't know why that's all you're finding/seeing. GG has been
archiving this group from the beginning. Here are its archived copies
of the first two threads in this group, beginning on January 10, 2006:
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.thunderbird/browse_thread/thread/44da6eaa460a30be
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.thunderbird/browse_thread/thread/78dc981df52314ed
It appears, however, that the archiving is incomplete, since there are
posts missing from both threads, and the missing posts don't include
the "X-No-Archive:" header.
> You are very silly or shortsighted to not use GG for searching
> newsgroups for information. It is an excellent resource.
>
> I never go to facebook. That is an entirely different subject.
> Facebook is a social networking place. GG is an information
> resource asset. Unfortunately it doesn't search as well as it used
> to.
Agreed.
Ken Whiton
--
FIDO: 1:132/152
InterNet: kenw...@surfglobal.net.INVAL (remove the obvious to reply)
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Then let me be more precise. If you post to the news.mozilla.org server
and not via Google Groups, Google will retain the message because they
grab the feed. If the expiry time is for example 60 days on the Moz
server then you cannot grab it off the MOZILLA server but if Google's
retention time is longer then you can grab it from them by logging into
"groups.google.com". When the Netscape Secnews server farm was 100%
active, we had three servers, secnews1,2 and 3. Secnews3 was the
archiving server that retained all messages from 1 and 2 for an
indefinite period of time. Only those with admin privs were able to
access #3 and obtain archived posts, etc.
When n.m.o was born it was hosted on the same machine as secnews and
archived via #3 as well. It's all gone now.
Google, at one time, archived posts from secnews but after many
complaints they pulled their feed.
Once a message has expired, you cannot obtain it any longer unless some
3rd party has it archived. Chris Ilias, for example, is one that
archives most all posts here and elsewhere. If you need a message that
has expired, you can ask him to retrieve it.
Yes, I have it right and I am not saying that GG doesn't have access to
messages, they do. And IIRC Google's expiry is one year, not indefinitely.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
No, you were/are correct. If a message has expired off the Moz server
then it's still available from GG for, I believe, one year from the date
of the post. I could easily be corrected on this one.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
It doesn't matter whether you use TB or OE or whatever else, the
messages are either there or not. If you click on a two-year-old message
and it's readable that means the retention time is at least 2-yo .. if
not then you may get an "expired message" notice. Simple enough!! :-)
Ken Whiton
*-* In Article <OPudnVcfS65s9uzW...@mozilla.org>,
*-* Jay Garcia wrote
*-* About Re: Lanikai Alpha 1 released
[ ... ]
> Yes, I have it right and I am not saying that GG doesn't have access
> to messages, they do. And IIRC Google's expiry is one year, not
> indefinitely.
No, Google Groups' retention is indefinite. See the dates in the
following example thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.rock-pop-r+b.1950s/browse_thread/thread/65b6a059e05c040e
Their search function doesn't seem to work very well on posts that
old, however.
[Cross-posted and follow-up set to mozilla.general]