MozillaZine

SM versions 2.57 and 2.65; where are they?

Discussion about Seamonkey builds
videobruce
 
Posts: 251
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: New York State

Post Posted June 20th, 2019, 6:10 am

Somewhere and somehow I managed to find these versions, downloaded both and tried both.
BUT, v2.65 was corrupted somehow and wasn't usable, but v 2.57 was. In fact I'm typing using 2.57 now. I tried looking for v2.65 and that and 2.57 are no-where to be found. #-o

What gives, on SM's download page only v 2.49 is available?
Chrome-Dome or any other browser that doesn't even have a Menu Bar (which should be standard for all programs) makes it a poor browser! Stop following M$'s lousy O/S.

videobruce
 
Posts: 251
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: New York State

Post Posted June 20th, 2019, 6:12 am

IIRC, it was a pop-up in SM that directed me to the page with a list of changes for each version (which I didn't bookmark). :(
Chrome-Dome or any other browser that doesn't even have a Menu Bar (which should be standard for all programs) makes it a poor browser! Stop following M$'s lousy O/S.

kerft
 
Posts: 506
Joined: January 30th, 2019, 9:38 am

Post Posted June 20th, 2019, 7:20 am

This discusses the status of seamonkey builds - https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey/Stat ... ource_Tree
Anything above 2.57 is only built to see if it compiles, not meant for use. This says in 2.57 that mail/news, and the sidebar do not work, and many extensions will not work.
2.53 is said to be fine, but it is not final. As of a while ago it was not available in languages other than English and German. Since it advertises a higher compatibility number in its user agent, it will work without overrides on more pages.

videobruce
 
Posts: 251
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: New York State

Post Posted June 20th, 2019, 8:17 am

Yes, 2.57 most extensions/add-ons do not work.
I wished I bookmarked that changelog page that had all the builds after 2.49 the update pop-up directed me to. The number of entries for a couple of those were numerous. There were versions below 2.57 in the list also IIRC.
Chrome-Dome or any other browser that doesn't even have a Menu Bar (which should be standard for all programs) makes it a poor browser! Stop following M$'s lousy O/S.

TPR75
 
Posts: 798
Joined: July 25th, 2011, 8:11 am
Location: Poland

Post Posted June 20th, 2019, 9:58 am

videobruce wrote:Somewhere and somehow I managed to find these versions[...]


Here:
http://www.wg9s.com/

2.49.5 is close to next official release. 2.53 will be interim release to give time for works under 2.57 version. What will be next is unknown so far...

Pim

User avatar
 
Posts: 2206
Joined: May 17th, 2004, 2:04 pm
Location: Netherlands

Post Posted June 24th, 2019, 6:07 am

I'm using 2.57 now and it looks almost usable.
Almost, because I can't find any ad blockers for it that work. Other than that, no problems.
Groetjes, Pim

videobruce
 
Posts: 251
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: New York State

Post Posted June 24th, 2019, 8:41 am

But, how about the conventional menu bar and navigation add on buttons?
Chrome-Dome or any other browser that doesn't even have a Menu Bar (which should be standard for all programs) makes it a poor browser! Stop following M$'s lousy O/S.

frg
 
Posts: 804
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted June 24th, 2019, 1:04 pm

> But, how about the conventional menu bar and navigation add on buttons?

Alle there but so much is still broken that it is only good for tests. We will see that 2.49.5 gets out the door and the concentrate only on 2.53 and 2.57. Doing backports to two trees 2.49and 2.53 and also fixing up the next version was too much so 2.57 took a backseat.

Mouse4
 
Posts: 655
Joined: December 27th, 2017, 4:03 am
Location: Australia

Post Posted June 24th, 2019, 8:38 pm

might wanna follow this thread viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2973875&start=525 about 2.53 an above

videobruce
 
Posts: 251
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: New York State

Post Posted June 25th, 2019, 12:16 am

Anyone know why that 'Simplify Page" in Print Preview and the ability to move the tab bar below the active page functions are missing that are availab'e in FF v56 and eariler??
Chrome-Dome or any other browser that doesn't even have a Menu Bar (which should be standard for all programs) makes it a poor browser! Stop following M$'s lousy O/S.

frg
 
Posts: 804
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted June 26th, 2019, 12:01 am

This was never in Seamonkey. Different frontend code. The SeaMonkey tab browser needs and overhaul anyway but don't hold you breath for the features to pop up soon :)

videobruce
 
Posts: 251
Joined: March 25th, 2006, 11:38 am
Location: New York State

Post Posted June 26th, 2019, 1:52 am

Problem is, just those 2 features are the deal breakers. Most everything else is fine. They exist in the (what I call) classic FF & adds, why not here? :(
Chrome-Dome or any other browser that doesn't even have a Menu Bar (which should be standard for all programs) makes it a poor browser! Stop following M$'s lousy O/S.

frg
 
Posts: 804
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Post Posted June 26th, 2019, 1:44 pm

> why not here

Because they where never in the product, are not everyones dealbreakers and we are extremly short on devs. If someone implements it I am happy to bring it thru the review phase and into the offical source as fast as possible.

4td8s
 
Posts: 650
Joined: June 24th, 2009, 1:07 pm

Post Posted July 2nd, 2019, 6:33 pm

Pim wrote:I'm using 2.57 now and it looks almost usable.
Almost, because I can't find any ad blockers for it that work. Other than that, no problems.


use SM 2.57 sparingly then. webextensions is not yet implemented in 2.57 and won't be in the immediate future (and thus no compatible ad blockers for it). I'm beta testing SM 2.57 on a backup hard drive on one of my PCs

Return to SeaMonkey Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest