Tree Closes For 0.9.8

Wednesday January 16th, 2002 has closed the tree to approved checkins only, starting as of 12am Wednesday, and will do so until 0.9.8 has branched. 0.9.8 will have a variety of new items including new natively drawn widgets on WindowsXP, Mac OS X, and GTK, when you are in the classic skin (We will have more on this later, including screenshots); the addressbook was rewritten, and now supports printing, a new "Get Map" button allowing you to query for a map based on a card address, and other stability fixes; Windows MAPI support; and a huge amount of performance and stability work.

Many believe this is one of the last milestones prior to 1.0, and that will actually have 1.0 following 0.9.9. 0.9.8 should branch sometime next week, with a release two Mondays from now. We'll keep you updated on both the branching and the release.

#124 Straight Talk

by SubtleRebel <>

Tuesday January 22nd, 2002 10:41 PM

You are replying to this message

The short answer is "No, that was not the question. Will you please answer the question that I asked?"

Now for the long answer...

Although my question is very clearly stated in my previous post, I will quote it for you again here:

"What is your basis for claiming that this feature would have been rejected if someone else had implemented it?"

It should be obvious, even to you, that this is not the same as your misguided attempt to rephrase my question as the following:

"Why do I say that code for a new feature that went against documented Mozilla architectural decisions would have been rejected if it were from someone other than the in-group that owns the feature area?"

First of all, you were not talking about "code for a new feature that went against documented Mozilla architectural decisions." You were talking about the implementation of code that enables themes to use native looking widgets. The feature in question does not go against any documented Mozilla architectural decisions.

Why is that you always try to change what other people are saying instead of just responding to what they actually say? (I'll make this one easier for you by making it multiple choice)

A) Is it because you know that many of your positions are indefensible when confronted with truth so you try to redefine opposing positions? B) Are you just trying to confuse things because you take some kind of perverse pleasure out of frustrating and offending other people? C) Are your reading comprehension skills so bad that you honestly do not understand concepts and questions presented in plain straightforward English? D) All of the above