New calendar XPIs available on January 9th.

[mostafah]

New calendar XPIs (build Jan 9th) are available on the main website at http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar .

Since the last build, these bugs have been fixed: 188890, 193467, 197569, 198640, 207357, 213441, 213667, 214325, 215259, 215375, 215594, 215683, 220050, 222325, 223505, 224403, 225339, 226660, 226762, 226949, 227225, 227410, 227730, 228257, 228626, 228836, 228849, 229329 and 229803.
Also thanks to Eric Belhaire's hard work thunderbird support became possible.

Mostafa

(Edited by alanjstr to fix url)

[Zain]

Awesome, thanks!

[michaell522]

Good stuff

Since the last build, these bugs have been fixed: 188890, 193467, 197569, 198640, 207357, 213441, 213667, 214325, 215259, 215375, 215594, 215683, 220050, 222325, 223505, 224403, 225339, 226660, 226762, 226949, 227225, 227410, 227730, 228257, 228626, 228836, 228849, 229329 and 229803.
Also thanks to Eric Belhaire's hard work thunderbird support became possible.

And to save others the copy and paste effort - a link to the that list of bugs

[tobypowell]

on the main website at http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar.

Mostafa

the forum thing seems to have mishandled that URL. To save everyone hassle it's :
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/

[jimstrickland]

Are there any plans to make official Mac builds of Calendar, or are we doomed to remain the unwanted stepchild.

[sasquatch]

Are there any plans to make official Mac builds of Calendar, or are we doomed to remain the unwanted stepchild.

I thought that was a conscious choice when purchasing your computer.

?

[sasquatch]

What versions of Firebird, Thunderbird, and Mozilla does the calendar support? Is there one installer for all versions? I have several different installs to "fix up" with the calendar if it is easy enough to do. I have Thunderbird .4 and .5, and Firebird "stable" and nightlies, and a handful of Mozillas of various flavors, all on Window (NT, XP, 2000, 98).

Does the calendar allow sending a reminder to an email address like Outlook? We need that in order to go with this?

Where can I find a features list and documentation ("How to.")?

Thanks

[jimstrickland]

Are there any plans to make official Mac builds of Calendar, or are we doomed to remain the unwanted stepchild.

I thought that was a conscious choice when purchasing your computer.

?

Actually, for some of us the choice was made by the company, not the individual. However, that does not matter. The entire Mozilla idea is based on a premise of cross platform compatibility. Therefore, Calendar, being an official part of Mozilla.Org should also follow the same premise. If that is not to be the case then it should not be espoused as such.

[michaell522]

Actually, for some of us the choice was made by the company, not the individual. However, that does not matter. The entire Mozilla idea is based on a premise of cross platform compatibility. Therefore, Calendar, being an official part of Mozilla.Org should also follow the same premise. If that is not to be the case then it should not be espoused as such.

The technology is cross-platform. Actually fixing the bugs and making the builds on different platforms requires some resources - Mozilla.org can't provide the resources for everything. If you make it a requirement that Mozilla.org only deals with the stuff they can do in-house, then Calendar (and Camino and a bunch of other stuff) go straight out of the window.

I think it's better to have things co-ordinated centrally, even if they're not part of the "core products" (which Calendar isn't).

[jimstrickland]

If you make it a requirement that Mozilla.org only deals with the stuff they can do in-house, then Calendar (and Camino and a bunch of other stuff) go straight out of the window.

I think it's better to have things co-ordinated centrally, even if they're not part of the "core products" (which Calendar isn't).

I quite agree. I do not feel that Mozilla.org should only deal with stuff they can do in-house. That would be conflicting with the entire notion of open source. However, what gets my dander in a tizzy is when someone makes statements about platform choice being entirely up to the individual. That is not always the case. The point I was originally trying to make was just a little plea not to forget MacOS users. We often feel like the unwanted stepchild because it so often seems that the Mac version of various Mozilla projects is just created as an afterthought. For an example, just take a look at the Calendar Project homepage. For the Mac there is just a link to someone else's website with the following note: <b> Note, These are unsupported builds, not created by Mozilla.org.</b> Even if Mozilla.org does not have the resources to create a Mac build in-house, is there any reason the provided link could not become the official Mac build. At least then there would be the appearance that the MacOS is important. I believe this is how we finally started getting Firebird builds again.

Another example is PDA synching with ANY mozilla projects. It seems that once the synching capability was completed for Windows everybody decided that nothing more needed to be done. Apparently nobody thinks that Mac users use PDAs. I have been searching the bug reports and forums and can't find any evidence that Mozilla.org is even looking for someone to bring this feature to the Mac. This despite the fact that a possible solution(jsync) has been brought up in both the bugs and in the forums.

Anyway, I am finished using my turn on the soapbox. As I state earlier, my only point was for people working on Calendar and other Mozilla Projects not to forget us MacOS users, and please don't tell us that we only have ourselves to blame since we chose to go Mac. I have absolutely no programming skills so the one thing I can do to actively contribute is to remind everybody that there is a very active MacOS community that loves and supports the many different Mozilla projects and would like to be included as legitimate members of the family.

[michaell522]

I quite agree. I do not feel that Mozilla.org should only deal with stuff they can do in-house. That would be conflicting with the entire notion of open source. However, what gets my dander in a tizzy is when someone makes statements about platform choice being entirely up to the individual. That is not always the case.

Fine. sasquatch making unfunny jokes about platform choice doesn't of course, reflect Mozilla.org's view...

For the Mac there is just a link to someone else's website with the following note: <b> Note, These are unsupported builds, not created by Mozilla.org.</b> Even if Mozilla.org does not have the resources to create a Mac build in-house, is there any reason the provided link could not become the official Mac build.

Not that I know of, except it would require a little more co-ordination between that person and the calendar folks, and jumping through a few process hoops in order to get the third party "trusted" to have permissions which let them upload builds.

Another example is PDA synching with ANY mozilla projects. It seems that once the synching capability was completed for Windows everybody decided that nothing more needed to be done. Apparently nobody thinks that Mac users use PDAs. I have been searching the bug reports and forums and can't find any evidence that Mozilla.org is even looking for someone to bring this feature to the Mac. This despite the fact that a possible solution(jsync) has been brought up in both the bugs and in the forums.

I'm not sure your view of the Windows side of things is entirely correct. PDA Sync on Windows is pretty clunky - lots of people can't make it work properly (I couldn't last time I tried), and questions about it generally go unanswered. Mozilla.org doesn't generally "look for" anything much beyond making sure the core products don't go backwards in terms of bugs - it relies on someone else doing the work and them saying "yes, we'll take that".

I have absolutely no programming skills so the one thing I can do to actively contribute is to remind everybody that there is a very active MacOS community that loves and supports the many different Mozilla projects and would like to be included as legitimate members of the family.

Unfortunately the active MacOS community (much like the Windows community) seems to have a lot of advocates and not too many programmers. If it helps anything, a couple of the Mozilla.org folks are also Mac users.

[jimstrickland]

Fine. sasquatch making unfunny jokes about platform choice doesn't of course, reflect Mozilla.org's view...

It normally wouldn't bother me...if it was one sasquatch. However, in the couple of years I have subscribed to this forum and others, quite a few sasquatches have made the same jokes.

Not that I know of, except it would require a little more co-ordination between that person and the calendar folks, and jumping through a few process hoops in order to get the third party "trusted" to have permissions which let them upload builds.

Maybe in the near future. Hope springs eternal.

I'm not sure your view of the Windows side of things is entirely correct. PDA Sync on Windows is pretty clunky - lots of people can't make it work properly (I couldn't last time I tried), and questions about it generally go unanswered. Mozilla.org doesn't generally "look for" anything much beyond making sure the core products don't go backwards in terms of bugs - it relies on someone else doing the work and them saying "yes, we'll take that".

I can't argue that point, other than clunky or not, at lease Windows users have something that works...sometimes. It would seem that with a little work jsynch could solve a lot of problems. I wonder why there seems to be such an aversion to creating a workable PDA solution for Mozilla when so many people depend on PDAs now?

Unfortunately the active MacOS community (much like the Windows community) seems to have a lot of advocates and not too many programmers. If it helps anything, a couple of the Mozilla.org folks are also Mac users.

I have had the pleasure of communicating with some of the Mac programmers on both the Firebird and Thunderbird side. They may be few in numbers, but their dedication is quite impressive. Hopefully, since it appears the Thunderbird team is going to be taking a greater interest in Calendar, and the few Mac programmers on that team seem quite active, perhaps some great strides in Calendar for the MacOS can also be achieved.

Thanks for sparring with me on this issue.

[sasquatch]

Are there any plans to make official Mac builds of Calendar, or are we doomed to remain the unwanted stepchild.

I thought that was a conscious choice when purchasing your computer.

?

Actually, for some of us the choice was made by the company, not the individual. However, that does not matter. The entire Mozilla idea is based on a premise of cross platform compatibility. Therefore, Calendar, being an official part of Mozilla.Org should also follow the same premise. If that is not to be the case then it should not be espoused as such.

an extra for the winkie impaired.

[sasquatch]

If you make it a requirement that Mozilla.org only deals with the stuff they can do in-house, then Calendar (and Camino and a bunch of other stuff) go straight out of the window.

I think it's better to have things co-ordinated centrally, even if they're not part of the "core products" (which Calendar isn't).

I quite agree. I do not feel that Mozilla.org should only deal with stuff they can do in-house. That would be conflicting with the entire notion of open source. However, what gets my dander in a tizzy is when someone makes statements about platform choice being entirely up to the individual. That is not always the case. The point I was originally trying to make was just a little plea not to forget MacOS users. We often feel like the unwanted stepchild because it so often seems that the Mac version of various Mozilla projects is just created as an afterthought. For an example, just take a look at the Calendar Project homepage. For the Mac there is just a link to someone else's website with the following note: <b> Note, These are unsupported builds, not created by Mozilla.org.</b> Even if Mozilla.org does not have the resources to create a Mac build in-house, is there any reason the provided link could not become the official Mac build. At least then there would be the appearance that the MacOS is important. I believe this is how we finally started getting Firebird builds again.

Another example is PDA synching with ANY mozilla projects. It seems that once the synching capability was completed for Windows everybody decided that nothing more needed to be done. Apparently nobody thinks that Mac users use PDAs. I have been searching the bug reports and forums and can't find any evidence that Mozilla.org is even looking for someone to bring this feature to the Mac. This despite the fact that a possible solution(jsync) has been brought up in both the bugs and in the forums.

Anyway, I am finished using my turn on the soapbox. As I state earlier, my only point was for people working on Calendar and other Mozilla Projects not to forget us MacOS users, and please don't tell us that we only have ourselves to blame since we chose to go Mac. I have absolutely no programming skills so the one thing I can do to actively contribute is to remind everybody that there is a very active MacOS community that loves and supports the many different Mozilla projects and would like to be included as legitimate members of the family.

I'm not knocking Macs. I have an IMAC at home, and am running OS 9.2.2 with Wamcom 1.3.1 (whatever the latest is). I'm bummed that OS X has taken over and nothing newer than 1.3.x is available to me.

[mezziah]

Fine. Downloading it right now.