And if they are going to implement PGP, great. But they should implement it/right/. If they screw it up, and it ends up being a usability problem, people will just disable it
Reply:
The feature is already implemented. By NAI, the developers of PGP, not Netscape.
The concerns, that the Mozilla module owner (which happens to be employed by Netscape) raises (and in which he got support from mozilla.org), are not about the UI, but the architecture. Basically he is saying that Mozilla Mailnews' architecture is not ready to incorporate that patch. I completely disagree (I work on Mozilla Mailnews, too).
Please read the bug report, if you are interested.
And if they are going to implement PGP, great. But they should implement it/right/. If they screw it up, and it ends up being a usability problem, people will just disable it
- The feature is already implemented. By NAI, the developers of PGP, not Netscape
- The concerns that the Mozilla module owner (which happens to be employed by Netscape) raises (and in which he got support from mozilla.org) are not about the UI, but the architecture. basically he is saying that Mozilla Mailnews' architecture is not ready to incorporate that patch. I completely disagree (I work on Mozilla, too).
I agree completely. This is exactly the reason why I don't run Debian - they don't get the tradeoff between stable and current right, for me. That's sad, because I'm sick of Redhat's treatment of downloaders.
Slashdot just influenced our perception of reality to what is good for Slashdot: By stressing the importance of that article, it tried to make us read and belief what is said there. "Coincidently", this is also good for Slashdot - the article calls communities the only hope, and Slashdot "happens" to provide the base for one.
So, how should these communites communicate, without companies?
> * It seamlessly allows local and remotely-running
> programs to work together on a display
As does Berlin, Berlin does even better than X.
> * It is flexible enough to allow programs to fully
> determine how it is to behave on lots of things
Berlin does, too. But it strongly encourages to use the common facilities.
Here, less freedom for the app developer means more freedom for the user.
Think GTK Themes, just with much more configurability. The user can easily replace a widgetset implementation, and it will apply to all apps, because the API for the widgetsets is standardized.
Have you checked out Berlin's design? It is very powerful and flexible.
BTW: If you "fix" X, it's not the standard X anymore. You "enhanced".
The idea behind OOUIs is to leave as much of the UI creation as possible to kits on the server side and so to reduce the static information (shipped with the application) to the minimum.
This gives the largest flexibilty to adapt to the user's environment (e.g. computing platform) and preferences.
Slashdot Mirror
Mark Bainter wrote:
Reply:And if they are going to implement PGP, great. But they should implement it /right/. If they screw it up, and it ends up being a usability problem, people will just disable it
- The feature is already implemented. By NAI, the developers of PGP, not Netscape
- The concerns that the Mozilla module owner (which happens to be employed by Netscape) raises (and in which he got support from mozilla.org) are not about the UI, but the architecture. basically he is saying that Mozilla Mailnews' architecture is not ready to incorporate that patch. I completely disagree (I work on Mozilla, too).
I agree completely. This is exactly the reason why I don't run Debian - they don't get the tradeoff between stable and current right, for me. That's sad, because I'm sick of Redhat's treatment of downloaders.
Slashdot just influenced our perception of reality to what is good for Slashdot: By stressing the importance of that article, it tried to make us read and belief what is said there. "Coincidently", this is also good for Slashdot - the article calls communities the only hope, and Slashdot "happens" to provide the base for one.
So, how should these communites communicate, without companies?
> * It seamlessly allows local and remotely-running
> programs to work together on a display
As does Berlin, Berlin does even better than X.
> * It is flexible enough to allow programs to fully
> determine how it is to behave on lots of things
Berlin does, too. But it strongly encourages to use the common facilities.
Here, less freedom for the app developer means more freedom for the user.
Think GTK Themes, just with much more configurability. The user can easily replace a widgetset implementation, and it will apply to all apps, because the API for the widgetsets is standardized.
Have you checked out Berlin's design? It is very powerful and flexible.
BTW: If you "fix" X, it's not the standard X anymore. You "enhanced".
> If you don't want to buy a hard drive with copy
> protection technology, then don't.
Bad luck that IBM makes really good drives.
(I *meant* Plain Text, grr!)
I have builds available at .
Huh? What can Comm. 4.x do in this regard what Moz can't? 4.x canÄt display HTML msgs as plaintext, can it?
From Overview:
4.x != MozillaClassic.
You can download MozillaClassic source code.
Most of the questions you ask are answered in the release notes, including the one about precompiled bins.
Also, try disabling gfx in Prefs|Debug.
The Release-Notes
You want something now? OK, download and compile Mozilla Classic (4.x) from Mozilla.org.
see the picture
see picture