10-03-03 Win32 build up

Arctic Dragon · Post by **Arctic Dragon** » March 10th, 2003, 3:39 pm

Netsabes wrote:been fixed since a week or so.

A week? Took me long enough to notice. :o

Post by **Nitin** » March 10th, 2003, 3:41 pm

Folks who've tried this build - Is the minimize-restore bug fixed on 2003-03-10?

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163372

The bug description says it might be, but i'm too chicken to try out 2003-03-10 yet.

daihard · Post by **daihard** » March 10th, 2003, 8:22 pm

Alex Bishop wrote:
Chris Cook wrote:
AGSHender wrote:What the HECK is that flashing? I got a headache just from loading my start page. I got my copy to run unlike the 08-03-03 build, which didn't go even with a new profile. Unfortunately, it has the flashing problem as it loads a page, so I switched back to the 04-03-03 build. Any different experiences or bug reports for any of you other bleeding edge types?

What the heck is that ^ date format?

dd-mm-yy?

Can we agree to use the standard (yyyy-mm-dd) format instead of the European or U.S. style? When I see 08-03-03, I have no idea whether it's August 3, 2003, March 8, 2003, or March 3, 2008, and I don't want to have to get it fom the context.

ehume · Post by **ehume** » March 10th, 2003, 8:32 pm

daihard wrote:Can we agree to use the standard (yyyy-mm-dd) format instead of the European or U.S. style? When I see 08-03-03, I have no idea whether it's August 3, 2003, March 8, 2003, or March 3, 2008, and I don't want to have to get it fom the context.

Amen.

daihard · Post by **daihard** » March 10th, 2003, 9:46 pm

ehume wrote:
daihard wrote:Can we agree to use the standard (yyyy-mm-dd) format instead of the European or U.S. style? When I see 08-03-03, I have no idea whether it's August 3, 2003, March 8, 2003, or March 3, 2008, and I don't want to have to get it fom the context.
Amen.

My deepest appreciation for your prayer...

AGSHender · Post by **AGSHender** » March 10th, 2003, 10:28 pm

I'll drink to that. I used whatever bastard European style I did just because I looked around and saw more people using that format than anything else. Personally, I prefer d/m/yy, but then that confuses everyone outside the US.

So, I'm looking forward to the *2003-03-11* build since the comments for the flashy bug seem to indicate that a fix was created and an attachment posted. Of course, it may not get checked in tonight, though. Here's hoping....

Mgz · Post by **Mgz** » March 11th, 2003, 1:15 am

/me tired with switch back, or wait and switch forward... so I sill endure with IE for a while

this flashing bug is really annoy

thanks god the XPCOM:Event....error is gone......

HW71 · Post by **HW71** » March 11th, 2003, 2:45 am

daihard wrote:Can we agree to use the standard (yyyy-mm-dd) format instead of the European or U.S. style? When I see 08-03-03, I have no idea whether it's August 3, 2003, March 8, 2003, or March 3, 2008, and I don't want to have to get it fom the context.

The decision for the yyyy-mm-dd - convention has been taken a few days / week ago in another nightly-build thread but since always new folks step in (which is btw a good thing

) this would not be the last thread with confusing date formats, I guess...

Nevertheless one might add a sticky thread to this forum containing some rules special for _this_ "Px build" forum, e.g. the used date format - but on the other hand this date format is not "special" to this forum, but should be used in all other forums, too... So either keep on dealing with confusing date formats or finding another soution for this...

HW71 · Post by **HW71** » March 11th, 2003, 2:47 am

btw: the hand cursor is back in 2003-03-10 for guys running Px on Win95 or WinNT 4.0

though I don't know whether it was already back in yesterdays build or not...

ProtectYaNeck · Post by **ProtectYaNeck** » March 11th, 2003, 12:08 pm

Anyone know where I can get a copy of 03-04, I made the mistake of overwriting it w/ 03-11.

Codeman · Post by **Codeman** » March 11th, 2003, 12:10 pm

ProtectYaNeck wrote:Anyone know where I can get a copy of 03-04, I made the mistake of overwriting it w/ 03-11.

ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/phoenix/night ... 4-08-trunk

ProtectYaNeck · Post by **ProtectYaNeck** » March 11th, 2003, 12:14 pm

Great! Thank you!

daihard · Post by **daihard** » March 11th, 2003, 10:17 pm

HW71 wrote:
daihard wrote:Can we agree to use the standard (yyyy-mm-dd) format instead of the European or U.S. style? When I see 08-03-03, I have no idea whether it's August 3, 2003, March 8, 2003, or March 3, 2008, and I don't want to have to get it fom the context.

The decision for the yyyy-mm-dd - convention has been taken a few days / week ago in another nightly-build thread but since always new folks step in (which is btw a good thing ) this would not be the last thread with confusing date formats, I guess...

We have a similar problem with SQL date format, where the standard is yyyy-mm-dd but a lot of users naturally put in date in dd-mm-yyyy or mm-dd-yyyy format and get rejected for incompatible format.

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » March 12th, 2003, 3:46 am

AGSHender wrote:I'll drink to that. I used whatever bastard European style I did just because I looked around and saw more people using that format than anything else. Personally, I prefer d/m/yy, but then that confuses everyone outside the US.

Actually I think you are the person confused. In US you use m/d/yy which is extremly inlogical.

d/m/yy is at least logical (smaller to larger) but my prefered is (yy)yy-mm-dd (larger to smaller).

m/d/yy is large to small to large, which is a compleatly insane way to write it.
Eg noone writes twohundred-fifty-three as

532 (equivalent to the US m/d/yy date format)
but
253 (larger to smaller)
or
253 (smaller to larger, if you are an arab and write RtL)

AGSHender · Post by **AGSHender** » March 12th, 2003, 7:40 am

Stefan wrote:
AGSHender wrote:I'll drink to that. I used whatever bastard European style I did just because I looked around and saw more people using that format than anything else. Personally, I prefer d/m/yy, but then that confuses everyone outside the US.

Actually I think you are the person confused. In US you use m/d/yy which is extremly inlogical.

d/m/yy is at least logical (smaller to larger) but my prefered is (yy)yy-mm-dd (larger to smaller).

m/d/yy is large to small to large, which is a compleatly insane way to write it.
Eg noone writes twohundred-fifty-three as

532 (equivalent to the US m/d/yy date format)
but
253 (larger to smaller)
or
253 (smaller to larger, if you are an arab and write RtL)

Yeah, that was my bad. I got all confused looking at the various date formats, so of course, I had a brain lock. What I meant was m/d/yy as what was used in the US and my preferred method of writing out the date.

10-03-03 Win32 build up

Re: 10-03-03 Win32 build up

Re: 10-03-03 Win32 build up

Re: 10-03-03 Win32 build up

Re: 10-03-03 Win32 build up

Re: 10-03-03 Win32 build up