Sorry, I'm a johnny-come-lately to the discussion. So you mean that the SeaMonkey project is going to be shut down after the release of 2.57 ? I'm very sorry to hear that.Frank Lion wrote:The day is fast approaching when SeaMonkey will not be updated security-wise at all. People already know that not much is planned after 2.57, where did they think security fixes would come from after that?
The future of Seamonkey?
- gracious1
- Posts: 37
- Joined: April 30th, 2016, 1:36 am
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
- Snake4
- Posts: 1841
- Joined: December 27th, 2017, 4:03 am
- Location: Australia
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
.....
Last edited by Snake4 on September 28th, 2021, 4:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- gracious1
- Posts: 37
- Joined: April 30th, 2016, 1:36 am
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Then what is meant by the warning that there will be no security updates to SeaMonkey?
- Frank Lion
- Posts: 21178
- Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
- Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Perhaps you would find it easier to understand if you read the whole post? -gracious1 wrote:Then what is meant by the warning that there will be no security updates to SeaMonkey?
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... #p14831468
On a personal note: that's the second damn time you've quoted me out of context now. Please stop doing that.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)
.
.
- LuvKomputrs
- Posts: 659
- Joined: June 9th, 2010, 8:15 am
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Am wondering if perhaps that SeaMonkey may become a fork or a standalone browser on its own merits without having to have Firefox as part of the UA string after version 2.57
We have many people here who use the SeaMonkey browser that would be willing to contribute time and $ to help keep the SeaMonkey browser going, me included.
We have great members of the SeaMonkey council, great extension/theme makers for SeaMonkey, and many members here with strong computer tech knowledge, etc.
SeaMonkey is one of the best browsers that I have ever used over the years and it would be a shame if didn't continue on.
And it deserves to continue on! It's very user friendly. The UI makes sense. It's secure. And very well maintained.
Good idea?
Long live SeaMonkey!
IMHO and professional opinion it's doable."Also note that SeaMonkey needs to completely stop relying on Mozilla’s infrastructure (*every single thing*, including this blog, bugzilla… you name it.. we need to be off it) by end of the year."
From :ewong: at https://blog.seamonkey-project.org/2019 ... ors-aside/
We have many people here who use the SeaMonkey browser that would be willing to contribute time and $ to help keep the SeaMonkey browser going, me included.
We have great members of the SeaMonkey council, great extension/theme makers for SeaMonkey, and many members here with strong computer tech knowledge, etc.
SeaMonkey is one of the best browsers that I have ever used over the years and it would be a shame if didn't continue on.
And it deserves to continue on! It's very user friendly. The UI makes sense. It's secure. And very well maintained.
Good idea?
Long live SeaMonkey!
-
- Posts: 1361
- Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
> We have many people here who use the SeaMonkey browser that would be willing to contribute time
I wouldn't count on the contribution time
Sec ports are harder to backport from later versions but we will see. I would like to report that 2.53 is at 60.8 level but it is more like 60.4 with a few high profile fixes up to 70a1. Overall I am more concerned with later web standards but personally things like services workers, web auth, payments api and wasm give me the creeps anyway.
FRG
I wouldn't count on the contribution time
Sec ports are harder to backport from later versions but we will see. I would like to report that 2.53 is at 60.8 level but it is more like 60.4 with a few high profile fixes up to 70a1. Overall I am more concerned with later web standards but personally things like services workers, web auth, payments api and wasm give me the creeps anyway.
FRG
- Snake4
- Posts: 1841
- Joined: December 27th, 2017, 4:03 am
- Location: Australia
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
.....
Last edited by Snake4 on September 28th, 2021, 4:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 307
- Joined: December 7th, 2005, 8:36 pm
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Firefox was only added to the UA string for compatibility with the increasing number of websites that do useragent sniffing and explicitly block anyone not using Firefox or Chrome. It wasn't there for a long time. (Firefox, by contrast, still includes OUR "mozilla/5.0" in their UA.)LuvKomputrs wrote:Am wondering if perhaps that SeaMonkey may become a fork or a standalone browser on its own merits without having to have Firefox as part of the UA string after version 2.57
- ElTxolo
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: July 30th, 2007, 9:35 am
- Location: Localhost
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Mouse4 wrote:Seamonkey was already Forked into ( icecat ) https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/ its only for Linux Though.
- As always, you prove you don't have the slightest idea what you're saying:
There was only, one version based on older versions of SeaMonkey, renamed/rebranded as IceApe by debian (Etch).GNUzilla is the GNU version of the Mozilla suite, and GNU IceCat is the GNU version of the Firefox browser.
So, to this day NOBODY has made a fork based on SeaMonkey code.
How to Ask Questions The Smart Way - How to Report Bugs Effectively
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20240318 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.2
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20240416 SeaMonkey/2.53.19
~
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20240318 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.2
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20240416 SeaMonkey/2.53.19
~
- LuvKomputrs
- Posts: 659
- Joined: June 9th, 2010, 8:15 am
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Am aware of that.LordOfTheBored wrote:Firefox was only added to the UA string for compatibility with the increasing number of websites that do useragent sniffing and explicitly block anyone not using Firefox or Chrome. It wasn't there for a long time. (Firefox, by contrast, still includes OUR "mozilla/5.0" in their UA.)LuvKomputrs wrote:Am wondering if perhaps that SeaMonkey may become a fork or a standalone browser on its own merits without having to have Firefox as part of the UA string after version 2.57
There should also be a way of by passing that useragent sniffing at some point and not having websites blocking anyone not using Firefox or Chrome.
That definitely needs to change.
And a good point about Firefox using OUR "Mozilla/5.0" in their UA.
SeaMonkey(Father) came before Firefox and it also deserves as much attention as Firefox(its child)
Last edited by LuvKomputrs on August 9th, 2019, 10:47 am, edited 2 times in total.
- LuvKomputrs
- Posts: 659
- Joined: June 9th, 2010, 8:15 am
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Very good points.ElTxolo wrote:Mouse4 wrote:Seamonkey was already Forked into ( icecat ) https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/ its only for Linux Though.
- As always, you prove you don't have the slightest idea what you're saying:
There was only, one version based on older versions of SeaMonkey, renamed/rebranded as IceApe by debian (Etch).GNUzilla is the GNU version of the Mozilla suite, and GNU IceCat is the GNU version of the Firefox browser.
So, to this day NOBODY has made a fork based on SeaMonkey code.
SeaMonkey has its own unique coding, UI and it doesn't necessarily have to become a fork.
Since it still will retrain SeaMonkey as its name for use as a browser.
If it were forked it would have a different name i.e SeaHorse and different coding, UA string, UI, perhaps a different/same rendering engine, etc.
SeaMonkey is my favourite browser.
I ♥ SeaMonkey
-
- Posts: 307
- Joined: December 7th, 2005, 8:36 pm
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
You can't really pass the useragent sniff without including the firefox substring, because the sites are testing for feature support by looking for the words "firefox" and then some magic number after them. There's not really anything you can do to successfully get past the test without including that substring.LuvKomputrs wrote:Am aware of that.LordOfTheBored wrote:Firefox was only added to the UA string for compatibility with the increasing number of websites that do useragent sniffing and explicitly block anyone not using Firefox or Chrome. It wasn't there for a long time. (Firefox, by contrast, still includes OUR "mozilla/5.0" in their UA.)LuvKomputrs wrote:Am wondering if perhaps that SeaMonkey may become a fork or a standalone browser on its own merits without having to have Firefox as part of the UA string after version 2.57
There should also be a way of by passing that useragent sniffing at some point and not having websites blocking anyone not using Firefox or Chrome.
That definitely needs to change.
And a good point about Firefox using OUR "Mozilla/5.0" in their UA.
SeaMonkey(Father) came before Firefox and it also deserves as much attention as Firefox(its child)
And really, that's the same reason everyone's useragent begins with "mozilla/", because it used to be needed to get into sites that explicitly checked for Netscape Navigator(and is probably still needed even though no one's coding for Netscape Navigator anymore). Heck, that's most of the contents of the useragent these days, magic terms to avoid breaking badly-designed sites.
It is a serious site design issue that blocks access by anything other than one of a few browsers specially-blessed by the designer, but it is one so ingrained that people do it automatically, no matter what sort of content they're serving up.
- LuvKomputrs
- Posts: 659
- Joined: June 9th, 2010, 8:15 am
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Very good points and well said.
At some point this will change. It's implemented at the moment and won't always remain this way.
SeaMonkey IMHO is the successor to Netscape Navigator since it has similar features. Not the same coding. And a different UI, etc.
I miss Netscape Navigator, but, I'm happily using SeaMonkey and I recommend to my clients and use it myself on a daily basis.
It is one of the best browsers out there and I have seen many in my long career in IT. Quite a lot.
I ♥ SeaMonkey
Every time I think of the useragent sniffing I think of a police dog from a K9 unit trying to find a criminal or drugs!LordOfTheBored wrote:You can't really pass the useragent sniff without including the firefox substring, because the sites are testing for feature support by looking for the words "firefox" and then some magic number after them. There's not really anything you can do to successfully get past the test without including that substring.
At some point this will change. It's implemented at the moment and won't always remain this way.
SeaMonkey IMHO is the successor to Netscape Navigator since it has similar features. Not the same coding. And a different UI, etc.
I miss Netscape Navigator, but, I'm happily using SeaMonkey and I recommend to my clients and use it myself on a daily basis.
It is one of the best browsers out there and I have seen many in my long career in IT. Quite a lot.
I ♥ SeaMonkey
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: March 18th, 2016, 6:22 am
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Hum... I am a bit confused. The "official" seamonkey seem to be at version 2.49.5 (now or within the next few days) and there is imho a fork with seamonkey 2.57, right? Wonder, what to do next . I used it for a very long time now (from 1.0x) and NescapeNavigator before [horrible time between ].LuvKomputrs wrote:....
If it were forked it would have a different name i.e SeaHorse and different coding, UA string, UI, perhaps a different/same rendering engine, etc.
SeaMonkey is my favourite browser.
I ♥ SeaMonkey
So...... changing something
What is the "fork" and from which point I can possibly go in which direction?
thx for informations
- Frank Lion
- Posts: 21178
- Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
- Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: The future of Seamonkey?
Nope, there is no fork.streaming5 wrote:The "official" seamonkey seem to be at version 2.49.5 (now or within the next few days) and there is imho a fork with seamonkey 2.57, right?
***
I do have to wonder what good all this speculation here does. I mean, a year after 2.49.4, 2.49.5 will soon be out. Back up your profile then look at it, decide if you like it, use it/don't use it. Same for 2.53 and 2.57. It really is that simple and that blunt.
Not like you're getting married to this stuff, there is no long-term commitment element here. You simply accept what update comes out..or..you don't. Even if you don't, it'll take 30 minutes to re-install and use again.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)
.
.