SillyDog701

[profman]

The folder, /pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/releases/mozilla1.7rc3 is now existant on the Mozilla ftp server. The files are appearing as I type this post.

The URL http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.7rc3/ goes to Release notes for Mozilla 1.7.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

[Wellander]

Hi,
Thank you for Info.
I just installed it.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608

[Ramona]

Thanks profman! I'm now downloading the new Release...

Ramona

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514

[Antony]

under the Mozilla 1.7RC3's What's New release notes

(Under the Hood)
Very wide images (more than 4095px) will now display on Mac.

What's the point of that?
The maximum desktop (manageable) width allowed in current Mac OS X is 4000 pixels, according to Apple tech notes
“Mac OS X allows a maximum desktop display width of 4000 pixels across all displays.â€

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/125.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.8

[Antony]

Thanks profman,

Our MozInfo701 reported this before the front page of Mozilla.org and MozillaZine.org.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/125.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.8

[DJGM]

As I type this, even MozillaNews hasn't published an article about the latest 1.7 RC yet.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514

[Andrew T.]

So far, Mozilla 1.7 Release Candidate 3 appears to be exactly the same as Release Candidate 2 in every single way, save a later build ID string and fewer bugs. Even so, this release was essential to development as well as the last step before the greatly-anticipated final release of Mozilla 1.7.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608

[profman]

Asa recently made a newsgroup post, entitled 1.7 status update, in which he predicts that Mozilla 1.7 Final could be out one week from 6/8/2004. This should make next Tuesday, June 15, the release date, although these dates have a habit of being pushed a bit later. The current Mozilla 1.7 Release Status gives June 11 as the anticipated release date for Mozilla 1.7 Final.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

[ChrisI]

Asa recently made a newsgroup post, entitled 1.7 status update, in which he predicts that Mozilla 1.7 Final could be out one week from 6/8/2004. This should make next Tuesday, June 15, the release date, although these dates have a habit of being pushed a bit later. The current Mozilla 1.7 Release Status gives June 11 as the anticipated release date for Mozilla 1.7 Final.

"If all goes well..."
Every status update will contain that preface.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608

[ChrisI]

under the Mozilla 1.7RC3's What's New release notes

(Under the Hood)
Very wide images (more than 4095px) will now display on Mac.

What's the point of that?
The maximum desktop (manageable) width allowed in current Mac OS X is 4000 pixels, according to Apple tech notes
“Mac OS X allows a maximum desktop display width of 4000 pixels across all displays.â€

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608

[Antony]

Thanks Chris,
I guess you did not get what I meant, why bother with images larger than 4000 pixels?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/125.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.8

[ryaxnb]

under the Mozilla 1.7RC3's What's New release notes

(Under the Hood)
Very wide images (more than 4095px) will now display on Mac.

What's the point of that?
The maximum desktop (manageable) width allowed in current Mac OS X is 4000 pixels, according to Apple tech notes
“Mac OS X allows a maximum desktop display width of 4000 pixels across all displays.â€

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040206 Firefox/0.8

[ChrisI]

Note to extension users:
Some of you may have noticed that if you click on a XPI file, residing anywhere other than mozilla.org, mozdev.org, texturizer.net, or your hard drive, nothing will happen.

To prevent users from installing malicious code unintentionally, extensions and add-ons now have a whitelist. To add a site to the list, enter about:config in the browser location bar. Search for the pref xpinstall.whitelist.add; and via the context menu, select Modify. When adding a site, just use the top level domain, without the prefixes (netscape.com).

The entire list is kept in the file hostperm.1 residing in your profile folder.

For more info, see Bug 240552: Make nsInstallTrigger::UpdateEnabled check with permission manager

Edit: You can disable the feature by setting xpinstall.whitelist.required to false

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608

[DJGM]

Note to extension users:
Some of you may have noticed that if you click on a XPI file, residing anywhere other
than mozilla.org, mozdev.org, texturizer.net, or your hard drive, nothing will happen.

While, in the most part, that is certainly a good thing, and will help to prevent what I would refer to
as "XPI abuse" (inserting some sort of malicious code or dodgy executable file into an XPI file) this
could well have negative consequences, for certain useful third party extensions that don't have
their files hosted at any of the aforementioned sites, such as the popular Home Button add-on.



What exactly is likely happen with these third party add-on projects. Are they likely to be
persuaded to have their files hosted at any of the aforementioned sites where applicable?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

[ChrisI]

What exactly is likely happen with these third party add-on projects. Are they likely to be
persuaded to have their files hosted at any of the aforementioned sites where applicable?

I don't know. This stuff is brand new, just implemented on Monday (Now we know what was holding up RC3).

Right now now, my best guess is that third party sites will put a message on their installation page on how to add it.

Ongoing discussion about the whitelist can be found here.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608