![mozilla kompozer mozilla kompozer](https://cdn.amebaowndme.com/madrid-prd/madrid-web/images/sites/1544931/d5f53f0cbdc71e53a160be98140b5ba8_8aedaa176deda564231e38be084037bc.jpg)
The KompoZer part will be kaze's in the first place and can happen later than right now. Well, it would seem we (= c-c current users) only care about the shared part in the short term. > Also, we need a plan of how regular builds are being done, and we need things No problem: making sure we agree on the SeaMonkey team just felt the right first step before asking the Thunderbird team. > Thunderbird side of the world as well, probably from dmose. My request is to confirm what I understood was agreed by mail, so Fabien knows "officially" he has a good base to continue his work.
#Mozilla kompozer Patch
Why? I was not intending to land this very patch anywhere: > 2) There needs to be a clear patch of where this is to land if it's reviewed. I obviously don't mean to touch his patch.
#Mozilla kompozer how to
> 1) A review request should always and only come from the developer that isĮh, it's the first patch from Fabien and my purpose was to show him how to actually proceed! It's good to have the work in progress public and for everyone to try and comment on, though. Also, when the request comes, I want it to come from Fabien, as I expect he will be the other fixing any review nits. IMHO, we are in a too early stage and have too many question marks to actually review anything in reasonable manner here. We need much more than just my OK for landing anything like this on comm-central, we need at least an approval from the Thunderbird side of the world as well, probably from dmose.Īlso, we need a plan of how regular builds are being done, and we need things to be tested.Īnd we need a clear plan of what patches are needed in which order to get things working as planned.Īlso, in this case, I really would like to see where KompoZer is in being an official Mozilla project, as usually only official projects land in the core repositories. While BlueGriffon, tri-licensed MPL+GPL+LGPL is already on track as a pureĬomment on attachment 424017 Ĭlearing out review request, it doesn't make sense coming from Serge and at this stage.ġ) A review request should always and only come from the developer that is planning to fix all review commentsĢ) There needs to be a clear patch of where this is to land if it's reviewed.īoth are not in place here yet. Reusable, modulo a minor changes, in any gecko-based editor, of course.īut I don't really understand why you want here a SM-based standalone editor Extensions to the "core editor tool" will be
#Mozilla kompozer mac os x
The mac os x build will look MUCH better than Nvu on macĭespite of he recent additions to Kompozer - very nice job Fabien, congrats !. That you just cannot rewrite in another way, but the very vast majority of theĬode is totally new. I still contains a few bits from Nvu, like helper functions The only codeĪddition to the core right now is the ftp stack, that dougt r+ recently. So we willīlueGriffon is a xulrunner-based app. To give to the evolutions of such a standalone tool at this time. We can remain rather independant from the evolutions of Firefox or Seamonkey.Īnd we _must_ remain independant because we don't have enough time or money Web editor has to be a totally independant xulrunner-app. I can predict you a ratherįast divergence between the two codebases. If that's what you want, I don't recommend it. You cannot have both at the same time, can you?ĭo you want to make (a) Semonkey composer evolve along thr Kompozer path (b)Įxtract it from the Seamonley suite (c) make a standalone app out of it sharing Isolated app Seamonkey means a set of apps bundled in the same executable. I don't understand what is a 'standalone Seamonkey' composer. > as possible with SeaMonkey, so both can profit from current developments in > standalone app, possibly rebranded, i.e. What the project here is about is basically to make a SeaMonkey Composer