<< What a Game! What a Champion! Who Dat! | The roads I take... | No FOSDEM For Me This Year >>

Weekly Status Report, W03/2010

Here's a summary of SeaMonkey/Mozilla-related work I've done in week 03/2010 (January 18 - 24, 2010):

This has been a really productive week again and it feels good to get real things moving and also start to do work and planning for SeaMonkey 2.1 now, turning the head back and putting out fires on 2.0 was really getting tedious - even though we have a slightly conservative approach here in SeaMonkey land, we are as much about progress and innovation as the rest of the Mozilla project (even if it is in our way and sometimes means the some changes are not as much into-your-face and revolutionary as in other projects but have more of a continuity label on them).
I hope we all can get into this more again now and get some exciting patches landed for the next version of our great suite.

Entry written by KaiRo and posted on January 25th, 2010 17:36 | Tags: L10n, Mozilla, SeaMonkey, Status | 3 comments | TrackBack




from Ru

O>>>I'm risking the next flame war against me with this, but I did a patch to react to the places expiration rework done for the whole Mozilla platform, which also removes the ability to limit history to a fixed number of days or sites, but instead goes with a memory percentage

Yes, you know how bad it is.))
Some users don't want to see when they visited the site, but for others it is important. For example I remember that 3 days ago I opened 20 pages in one forum and I want to find 1 page. In SM 1.x it's easy - I go in History in 3 days ago folder and the site's folder an see list of 20 pages. In case there is no folder for 3 days ago - I will have what? A list of 200 pages found after search? And do I have to remember all domains of sites I've visited - for entering in search?
9 days limit in history is OK for me, limit in number of pages or memory is bad - I don't need older entries, but I will have them as I see.

It's better when history and bookmarks were in exact place - it's easy to find them, but now they will be like garbage - nowhere.

>>>I worked on patching the dialog and posted screen shots of this work in progress in the bug

It's better.

And what about saving in browser pages with css and images? ))
2010-01-25 21:35




I don't think the grouping of pages in the UI is affected in any way, so your fears are probably wrong. What is affected is that we don't delete pages from history when they are older than x days, but when they are the oldest pages and history uses more than x percent of the available memory.
This has nothing to do with how we present things in the UI, only with what we delete from our storage.
For details, read the blog post from the actual developer of the changes.

About the saving topic, I have no idea about that, please look for the relevant bug report.

I'm not much of a developer, I only take on small cosmetic things, my main job is to coordinate the project and not to dig into code I don't understand in the first place (and the whole saving stuff is something I don't understand one bit).

Last edited by KaiRo at 2010-01-26 13:56

2010-01-26 13:40


from UK

OI am not tech savvy enough (yet) to understand about the new history feature coming up in the next release but I just wanted to say I am glad you do things at a different pace than fx does... the result is a more stable, less RAM hungry reliable browser, one so nice that I dumped the once reliable and great fx and tb for it. Looking forward to the next release and please keep it as wonderful as it is now.

As for the history change, well you can please some of the people some of the time...

Thanks for reading Mr Kaiser
2010-01-27 13:00

Add comment