Hello, Charles.

I was using Firefox 2.x (Windows, Linux), Opera 9.x (Windows, Linux), Internet Explorer. Everything was working fine except for 1 annoying bug in the latest release that's denies to login on Firefox.

I don't think that browser names should be displayed in the requirements, because there are a lot of differences in the browsers engine realization (even in the same family). The key here is to specify generic functionality that is used in the Roundcube that at least must be supported in order to work. If we’ll add some browser’s names to the list it would mean that we’ll give support obligations to the community to 100% support for these browsers and it wouldn’t be right. My advice is to keep things like they are now – if your browser is supporting specified functions in the requirement it should work, if it’s supporting and not working – create ticket and we’ll try to investigate the problem.

I agree that there is should be a list with the browsers that were reported as working/non-working but definitely not in the requirements section but may be at the bottom of the page.

Regards, Andris

Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:31:48 -0600 From: chasd
Subject: [RCD] "Supported" browsers To: RoundCube Dev
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes;

format=flowed

At the link

Only this is mentioned for browser requirements :

• Javascript enabled
• Accept cookies
• Support for XMLHttpRequest

Since I have some users on old or odd platforms, I was wondering if

there should be a list of "tested" browsers. This may be incorrect, but from reading the Dev mail list, it seems

the main developers test on the major browsers.

IMHO it seems that RoundCube is "tested" on

IE 6 ( Win XP ) and 7 ( Win XP and Vista ) Safari 2 ( OS X 10.4.x ) and 3 ( OS X 10.4.x and 10.5.x, Win XP,

Vista )

Firefox 2 ( Win XP, OS X 10.4.x )

Should that specifically be mentioned in the browser requirements ?

Are there others that are smoketested by Devs ?

If other browsers are known to work by users, those could be added

to

a "reported to work" section, so there is not an implication those browsers are regularly used by the Devs. I think Opera 9 is used by others on the Dev list, and I use

Camino,

although always the very latest release.

Maybe there should also be a "known not to work" section so bugs don't get filed that will likely never be addressed ? I realize that if IE 6 works, you have covered almost every Windows

user, but the Mac platform has had many different browsers

available

for it, and many different versions of those. Sadly each with differing capabilities as far as HTML, CSS, and ECMAScript support.

Such browsers would be Safari 1.2x or 1.0.x ( OS X 10.3.x, 10.2.x

),

Firefox 1.0.x or 1.5.x, Mozilla Suite ( Mac OS 9 ), IE 4.x ( Mac OS

9 ), iCab, etc. Charles Dostale System Admin - Silver Oaks Communications http://www.silveroaks.com/ 824 17th Street, Moline IL 61265

-- Tavs bezmaksas pasts Inbox.lv

List info: http://lists.roundcube.net/dev/