0.9.1 coming

Discussion of general topics about Mozilla Firefox
Post Reply
sasquatch
Posts: 6022
Joined: November 25th, 2003, 8:56 am

Post by sasquatch »

Steffen wrote:
sasquatch wrote:...
No. On starting a new release of Firefox the first time, you get a dialog informing you which extensions and themes were disabled. It also provides an update button.
Besides, disabled extensions are still listed in the extension manager and can be updated by clicking the update button.


So, the procedure is to restart with new version, attempt to update, if no updates available take your chances with old version?
kstahl
Moderator
Posts: 1521
Joined: December 22nd, 2003, 5:27 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Post by kstahl »

Yes. Be brave, young rabbit.
User avatar
ehume
Posts: 6743
Joined: November 17th, 2002, 12:33 pm
Location: Princeton, NJ, USA

Post by ehume »

I believe that the problems with themes and extensions listed with too low a max version has been fixed in the newest build (2004-06-24). I imagine the same will be true with 0.9.1.
Firefox: Sic transit gloria mundi.
djl47
Posts: 253
Joined: October 9th, 2003, 12:49 am
Location: California

Post by djl47 »

ehume wrote:I believe that the problems with themes and extensions listed with too low a max version has been fixed in the newest build (2004-06-24). I imagine the same will be true with 0.9.1.


The browser displays an error message that it will not install the theme. There is no option to override.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040624 Spacegecko/0.9.0+
(Trust me, it's June 24 build with a couple of extensions installed :-)
User avatar
ehume
Posts: 6743
Joined: November 17th, 2002, 12:33 pm
Location: Princeton, NJ, USA

Post by ehume »

Well then, maybe tomorrow.

In the interim, put this line in user.js:

user_pref("app.version", "0.9.0");
Firefox: Sic transit gloria mundi.
supernova_00
Posts: 4832
Joined: June 24th, 2004, 8:03 pm
Location: Maryland, USA

Post by supernova_00 »

please fix this bug...i have done everything I can think of to install themes and extension but nothing will work.
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=246113
Warduke
Posts: 630
Joined: November 4th, 2002, 7:49 pm

Post by Warduke »

In case some have missed it, Ben edited the first post of this thread...

Updates:
- the visual display version number will read "0.9.1" but since the update system works poorly at present (the generic web service is not yet deployed on update.mozilla.org) the extension app version will remain 0.9.0. This should not be a problem as there are not major changes that would cause extensions to break.
- We are taking only the fixes above plus a few other critical issues. Other bugfixes that have taken place on the aviary branch-trunk ("brunk") since 0.9 was released (such as the new security indication etc) will not be included to minimize QA issues.
Firefox : One Browser to Rule Them All.
User avatar
Carson
Posts: 771
Joined: September 7th, 2003, 2:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Post by Carson »

[Best writer award (and not for the first time): Sasquatch. :-)]
Khaine
Posts: 43
Joined: November 7th, 2003, 6:07 pm
Contact:

Post by Khaine »

This is good, I only hope it doesn't screw up my current profile
User avatar
scratch
Posts: 4942
Joined: November 6th, 2002, 1:27 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post by scratch »

Steffen wrote:vfwlkr, I think one of the reasons for the new extension management is to avoid installing outdated extensions which break the app.


so just bump the EM version number any time you make a change that would make extensions incompatible. don't bump the EM version when you release a new version of FF that lets old extensions still work. I'm pretty sure that's what vfwlkr meant. the question is, how easy would it be for the devs to determine for sure when they've made changes that render old extensions incompatible. if that's too difficult, it makes this solution impractical.
User avatar
logan
Posts: 3453
Joined: May 22nd, 2003, 3:51 pm
Location: NGC 2403
Contact:

Post by logan »

updated toolbar buttons (back/forward, reload) look much better, good work guys :)
Lost User 23429
Posts: 0
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 5:00 pm

Re: 0.9.1 coming

Post by Lost User 23429 »

bengoodger wrote:and the wacky infinite restart loop

... and some updates to Winstripe.

We'll have candidates available for testing available shortly. .
I have a feeling that after getting 0.9 off their shoulders, the devs are working with much better efficiency. Yes, that happens to me too when I finish off my finals and start back the research work.

Carry on the good work.
adamb
Posts: 16
Joined: June 9th, 2004, 11:37 pm

Winstripe in 0.9.1

Post by adamb »

Whoa! Major upgrade to Winstripe! It looks good! I'm quite impressed with the primary five icons. I will miss the directional triangles. I thought they were a neat "different" feel, but the new forward and back arrows are just great. Refresh looks super. So does "stop." The house is pretty standard fare, although much more like Qute than Winstripe's first take at it. Losing the low-laying shadows was probably a good choice, considering how non-Windows-y that style of shadow is.

I'm... still... waiting... for the <strong>new</strong> "new tab" icon -- one that <em>doesn't</em> look like a toaster. Other "secondary" icons I'm assuming will be updated to fit more with this style?

But seriously, this is great. Small icons look good, too! Great job to Gerich and Horlander! It seems there was a dramatic response to feedback generated regarding the theme.
tmeader
Posts: 434
Joined: May 3rd, 2004, 10:30 pm

Post by tmeader »

Am I the only one using the 0.9.1 build that has it still saying "0.9" in about Firefox?

Thought Ben said that visually it would say 0.9.1, but that to extemsions it would appear to be 0.9. Well, on my end, it's VISUALLY 0.9 too.

Not like it's a big deal, but just wondering if this is what everyone else is seeing.
User avatar
scratch
Posts: 4942
Joined: November 6th, 2002, 1:27 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post by scratch »

0.9.1 isn't out yet. this is the first build on the 0.9.1 branch. those changes probably haven't been checked in yet.
Post Reply