4 May 2010 20:53
8 May 2010 20:33
Moderated Newsgroup mozilla.dev.security.policy
David E. Ross <nobody <at> nowhere.invalid>
2010-05-08 18:33:07 GMT
2010-05-08 18:33:07 GMT
On 5 May, Kathleen Wilson posted in mozilla.dev.security.policy a message containing the following: > Note that postings to this newsgroup are now going through a spam > filter and an administrative interface. This may initially cause some > delay in postings. It appears that mozilla.dev.security.policy is now moderated (administrative interface). Please explain why. Was there a bugzilla.mozilla.org bug report requesting this change? Please provide an E-mail address for the moderator so that questions can be submitted regarding rejected newsgroup messages. I munge my E-mail address for newsgroup messages. Many others do this too, so you cannot merely reply to a From address in a message if you reject a submission. Finally, since moderation will delay the appearance of messages, the discussion period for requests to add root certificates to the NSS database should be increased. NOTE: I posted newsgroup messages similar to this one twice to mozilla.dev.security.policy, on 5 May and 7 May; but they never appeared in that newsgroup. I see nothing in this message or its prior versions that would warrent rejection. A similar message was sent via E-mail to Kathleen Wilson on 6 May, to her E-mail address extracted from a bugzilla.mozilla.org bug report; but she never replied. Also note that rejection of newsgroup comments to specific requests to add root certificates to the NSS database is likely to increase the number of comments added to the related bug reports. Even the mere delay of newsgroup comments might increase the number of bug report(Continue reading)
9 May 2010 00:33
Re: Moderated Newsgroup mozilla.dev.security.policy
JoeS <joesab2005 <at> gmail.com>
2010-05-08 22:33:44 GMT
2010-05-08 22:33:44 GMT
On 5/8/2010 2:33 PM, David E. Ross wrote: > It appears that mozilla.dev.security.policy is now moderated > (administrative interface). Seems to be a "sign of the times" Quite a few venues going to moderated, or mailing list format. You might call this the "Ivory Tower" syndrome. I didn't see anything particularly disruptive going on there to justify moderation. -- -- JoeS Using TB3 http://kb.mozillazine.org/Thunderbird_3.0_-_New_Features_and_Changes https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Thunderbird/Thunderbird_Binaries http://kb.mozillazine.org/Breakpad#Using_the_application_to_view_crash_reports
11 May 2010 17:08
Re: McAfee users beware of todays update
David River <harlemdrum <at> gmail.com>
2010-05-11 15:08:49 GMT
2010-05-11 15:08:49 GMT
On Wednesday April 21 2010 06 20 PM, Terry R. wrote: > Nothing like deleting system files to screw up your day... > http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=2003&tag=nl.e589 > > Terry R. Okay great tip...I personally use Microsoft Security Essentials along with Avast free edition...combo works fine...all problems caught mostly by Microsoft.
11 May 2010 17:25
Re: Super idea for developoers
Dr. D Rivera PhD. <harlemdrum <at> gmail.com>
2010-05-11 15:25:28 GMT
2010-05-11 15:25:28 GMT
On Tuesday March 30 2010 07 31 PM, Don wrote: > Terry R. wrote: >> On 3/30/2010 11:40 AM On a whim, Ron Hunter pounded out on the keyboard >> >>> KOLANICH wrote: >>>> Because the firefox is the slowest browser of browsers (IE is not a >>>> browser, it is shit.) and Google Chrome is the fastest (And has GNU >>>> GPL License) i suggest the developers to remake V8 to work in firefox >>>> saving API and other useful tools. >>> >>> having used all the major browsers, I seriously doubt reviews, and/or >>> tests that indicate that Google Chrome is faster than Firefox. If there >>> are differences, they are mainly in areas that I don't seem to use, >>> because Firefox matches, or beats GC at everything I do. But then I am >>> using FF 3.7a3 at the moment, and it has several improvements over >>> even 3.6. >> >> EVERY machine I have installed Chrome on is noticeably faster than FF. >> If a user can see it with their eye, it is easily apparent, and every >> user has commented on "how much faster" Chrome is. And for that >> reason, most are using it on a daily basis, since they no longer use >> themes or add-ins that would break from FF updates. I was surprised >> none of them seem to mind the simplistic UI either. They just want >> pages to load quickly so they can get their work done. >> >> I'll set a follow-up to mozilla.general, although I don't think it's >> warranted... >> >> Terry R. >(Continue reading)
11 May 2010 21:01
Re: Super idea for developoers
Ron Hunter <rphunter <at> charter.net>
2010-05-11 19:01:14 GMT
2010-05-11 19:01:14 GMT
Dr. D Rivera PhD. wrote: > On Tuesday March 30 2010 07 31 PM, Don wrote: >> Terry R. wrote: >>> On 3/30/2010 11:40 AM On a whim, Ron Hunter pounded out on the keyboard >>> >>>> KOLANICH wrote: >>>>> Because the firefox is the slowest browser of browsers (IE is not a >>>>> browser, it is shit.) and Google Chrome is the fastest (And has GNU >>>>> GPL License) i suggest the developers to remake V8 to work in firefox >>>>> saving API and other useful tools. >>>> >>>> having used all the major browsers, I seriously doubt reviews, and/or >>>> tests that indicate that Google Chrome is faster than Firefox. If there >>>> are differences, they are mainly in areas that I don't seem to use, >>>> because Firefox matches, or beats GC at everything I do. But then I am >>>> using FF 3.7a3 at the moment, and it has several improvements over >>>> even 3.6. >>> >>> EVERY machine I have installed Chrome on is noticeably faster than FF. >>> If a user can see it with their eye, it is easily apparent, and every >>> user has commented on "how much faster" Chrome is. And for that >>> reason, most are using it on a daily basis, since they no longer use >>> themes or add-ins that would break from FF updates. I was surprised >>> none of them seem to mind the simplistic UI either. They just want >>> pages to load quickly so they can get their work done. >>> >>> I'll set a follow-up to mozilla.general, although I don't think it's >>> warranted... >>> >>> Terry R.(Continue reading)
12 May 2010 21:32
Mozilla Scheduled Downtime – 05/12/2010, 3pm – 11pm PDT (0200 – 0600 UTC)
matthew zeier <mrz <at> mozilla.com>
2010-05-12 19:32:01 GMT
2010-05-12 19:32:01 GMT
We will have a scheduled maintenance window tonight from 7:00pm to 11:00pm PDT. The following changes will take place: * 7:00pm PDT (0200 UTC) Socorro updates. We'll be picking up Socorro 1.6.3 tonight (bug 565066) . During this window, processors and collectors will need to be restarted and may be offline for some period of time. Duration 2 hours. Please let me know if you have any reason why we should not proceed with this planned maintenance. As always, we aim to keep downtime to as little as possible, but unexpected complications can arise causing longer downtime periods than expected. All systems should be operational by the end of the maintenance window. Feel free to comment directly if you see issues past the planned downtime.
13 May 2010 11:08
Re: OT - Frankness vs. Oversensitivity
Gervase Markham <gerv <at> mozilla.org>
2010-05-13 09:08:15 GMT
2010-05-13 09:08:15 GMT
On 12/05/10 18:37, Peter Lairo wrote: > I sent my response to Gerv's outrageous post via private message. I'm glad you noted that fact here, because it enables me to report that I haven't received it. Where did you send it? Perhaps you could try sending it again to gerv <at> mozilla.org. However, the fact that you think my very measured and carefully worded response is "outrageous" suggests to me that you have lost all sense of proportion, are incapable of considering even the smallest criticism of your behaviour, and are unlikely to be a reasonable partner for discussion. So I'm afraid I don't have high hopes for our conversation. Perhaps I will be pleasantly surprised. > Follow-up set to mozilla.general I don't read mozilla.general, so it's probably not a good place to follow up to. Gerv
13 May 2010 14:23
Re: OT - Frankness vs. Oversensitivity
Jay Garcia <Jay <at> JayNOSPAMGarcia.com>
2010-05-13 12:23:10 GMT
2010-05-13 12:23:10 GMT
On 13.05.2010 04:08, Gervase Markham wrote: --- Original Message --- >> Follow-up set to mozilla.general > > I don't read mozilla.general, so it's probably not a good place to > follow up to. No, but it does demonstrate that frustration isn't limited to just the "rank and file".-- -- *Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion* www.ufaq.org Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Flock - Thunderbird
13 May 2010 16:50
Re: OT - Frankness vs. Oversensitivity
Peter Lairo <Peter <at> Lairo.com>
2010-05-13 14:50:31 GMT
2010-05-13 14:50:31 GMT
On Thu. 13.05.2010 11:08, Gervase Markham wrote:
> you have lost all sense of
> proportion, are incapable of considering even the smallest criticism
Gerv:
Why did you feel compelled to add even more insults to your previous
ones? I have shown great restraint in not responding to your outrageous
post in order to avoid a flame-war.
Well. If you insist on insulting me publicly, then I must respond:
>> I have to accept that you want to have *discussions* within that cocoon,
>> but please post important information (like schedules) *also* to more
>> open places (like here in mozilla.dev.apps.thunderbird).
>
> Peter,
>
> While the above message is not explicitly offensive, may I suggest that
> the hints of snideness and entitlement in this posting are not straight
> out of "How to Win Friends and Influence People"? You may disagree with
> how the Thunderbird project has chosen to organize its communications,
> but it would be good to remember that influence on these decisions, and
> the right to criticize them, is generally in rough proportion to
> contribution.
Gerv:
You spent ~72 words (vs. my ~35), including two quite "explicitly
offensive" words ("snideness" and "entitlement" vs. my only one:
(Continue reading)
RSS Feed