gracious1 wrote:There is no need to refer to Pale Moon as "legacy Pale Moon". This is a rhetorical device you are employing.
Um, you do realize "legacy PM" the thread title?
Sun42 wrote: …unless Pale Moon gets the UXP update and Basilsik ls clearly marked as a rolling release unstable experiment.
Um… Moonchild has also made that completely clear.
Ugh, you intentonally mis-quoted me, you even added a "." after "experiment" while while the whole quote is "... experiment in the browser itself.". That is kainda way beyound "rhetoric" and reaches into ... no, I won't label it. That's why academic standards have quoting rules like ... experiment [...].", see?
Anyway, Moonchild did not make it completely clear: Surf to pale-moon-browser.org, read...
"A XUL-based web-browser demonstrating the Unified XUL Platform (UXP). This browser is a close twin to pre-Servo Firefox in how it operates."
... click "Download", click "Installer", use browser. Maybe glance at Requirements or Features while downloading. In nether of these steps there was an indication about Basilisk being yadayadayada type of software, esp. not in the bowser iteself while with a "First use information" page or similar.
gracious1 wrote:BTW, Australis is a UI. Possessing Australis does not make a browser superior. Many would argue that while newer it is an inferior UI.
I do realize I'm talking to the "Australis is the root of all evil" crowd here, but Basilisk has a way more pressing need to fork and will reach a more generic crowd of users looking for a new home after Mozilla abandoned them.
Btw, it can be argued that using DOS command line or punch cards do not make a superior OS, and newer so-called newer "graphical" UIs are in fact inferior. If you agree, you just passed the nerd test with flying colors
Sun42 wrote:We are talking about the developer's intentions.
Nope, you are talking about the dev's intentions, I'm talking about the thread title which specified no such constraint - even thugh the first post is about the addon devs being mistaken. And if addon devs are too simple-minded to crawl though the forum searching for the threads specified above, how about poor ol' Joe Sixpack user?
Ignoring why/where the people who are under a mistaken impression have gotten this impression in the first place doesn't help solve our common goal not to fragment the legacy addon community by pulling away users from a stable browser to a rolling release which might self-destruct anytime with "I told you so"
As for addon devs, maybe there is the wish to have a common plattform near to latest Firefox asap - i.e. Waterfox and Basilisk" as a development target, and that's why some understand what they want to read, while missing that legacy Pale Moon is getting the UXP platform, too.
That's why a "Mommy told us so by leaving a sticky note at the fridge door in the cellar"-type argument :-p is not enough, it's about discussing where the actual root of the problem is (even if its malicious intent to torpedo Pale Moon) and having proposals for possible solutions.