SeaMonkey:Reasons: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(resort) |
(→biesi) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==bz== | ==bz== | ||
==Neil Rashbrook== | ==Neil Rashbrook== | ||
== | ==Christian Biesinger== | ||
What I want in Seamonkey... | |||
* I want a browser for "me" not necessarily for "everyone" | |||
* Less focus on extensions, default install should contain stuff people want | |||
* More control and choice to the user | |||
* Integrated Browser and Mail/News-Client | |||
==Stefan Borggraefe== | ==Stefan Borggraefe== | ||
==Ben Bucksch== | ==Ben Bucksch== | ||
Revision as of 18:15, 11 March 2005
I'd like to understand the reasons why people are interested to keep SeaMonkey alive. I know mine (BenBucksch) are very different from those of some users.
This has major influence on the way we're taking and the change we'll make to SeaMonkey in the future, in all areas: UI, merging with Gecko, infrastructure.
Developers
bz
Neil Rashbrook
Christian Biesinger
What I want in Seamonkey...
- I want a browser for "me" not necessarily for "everyone"
- Less focus on extensions, default install should contain stuff people want
- More control and choice to the user
- Integrated Browser and Mail/News-Client
Stefan Borggraefe
Ben Bucksch
Reasons to keep SeaMonkey
Developed 2 browsers based on it and need to keep them thriving
Problems with Firefox
- Extreme instability code-wise (impossible to base derivates on it)
- 'We're not accepting patches' shows general attitude of some developers
Desired changes to SeaMonkey
- Leaner UI (at least removing redundant UI)
- make browser and mail client different processes