[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On 10/11/2009 11:29 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
On 10/11/2009 11:16 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On 10/11/2009 04:54 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
It was ok to ship a "beta" release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
it would have prudent to disable "smart folders" and "indexing" by
default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.

Precisely. F11 is supposed to be a stable release. The sudden
appearance of both smart folders and indexing was unexpected,
disruptive and IMO did not achieve the desired quality level for a
Fedora stable release upgrade.
ACK, but ...

There is a difference between stable and static,  if we have a beta of
> thunderbird in F11, then it expected to change between beta releases.

... to me, in this context "stable" should also imply "sufficently "functional" rsp. "near release quality". From my experiences with the thunderbird-3*betas in F11, this does not apply to any of the thunderbird we had in F11 [1].

The new search features are very cool, we should be happy someone uses
the time to give us all this cool new features.
Well, "coolness" is relative - It's a "feature", I have never missed or been waiting for :-)


[1] I have been (and still am) facing: Corrupted (imap) mail-indices, mal-formated subject lines, being unable to send non-base64 encoded attachments, sth. occasionally producing duplicate mails and several other nuisances (e.g. one core dump at average per day).

New with 3*b4: A significant slowdown, seemingly due to indexing at startup, "compacting folders" triggers warnings in deep imap-folders (used to work with older thunderbirds and still works with evolution).

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]