Talk:Lightning (software)

Naming problem

There is a problem here, Mozilla doesn't have its name appended to the product name. Therefore we are breaching their rights. We should rename it to Lightning (Mozilla), or The Lightning Project, or something of that order T. Moitie ^[talk] 21:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

• Breaching? How? Anyway, how about Lightning (software) or Lightning (Thunderbird extension)? - Sikon 01:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Mozilla is a registered trademark of Mozilla. You can only use the name in officially branded names. Its why the unofficial builds of Mozilla Firefox are called Bon Echo and Minefield. We use the name as fair use in other articles such as Mozilla Thunderbird and Mozilla Firefox. Using it to describe a non-official product is breaching their rights. You know how Google are suing journalists for using Google as a verb? Those are the rights they have. - T. Moitie ^[talk] 14:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Yea I like Lightning (software), I think it would be ok there. T. Moitie ^[talk] 14:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Faisal.akeel (talk · contribs) moved it back to Mozilla Lightning without explanation, but didn't move the talk page. - Sikon 09:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

In fact, he did a cut-and-paste move, which I've duly undone. ::sighs:: —Nightstallion (?) 17:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Integration with OO.o

I don't know if it's relevant here, but OpenOffice.org is planning on using Thunderbird + Lightning as a personal information manager. Source: [1] Oberiko 18:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Release History

I feel that the third paragraph where the release dates are spewed out would be better suited as a table, rather than a long unreadable sentence. I shall leave it to somebody who knows the best way to do that though. Bewilderedferret (talk) 23:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Contradiction?

The article states: "Unlike the discontinued Mozilla Sunbird and Mozilla Calendar extension, Lightning aims to integrate tightly with Thunderbird. The Lightning project is being developed simultaneously with the Sunbird project, ...(etc.)". Then, how come Sunbird "is being developed" if it was discontinued? --SciCorrector (talk) 17:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

According to [2] it looks like Sunbird 1.0 beta 1 was the last release of Sunbird and development of new versions is discontinued. Feel free to update the article. -- Schapel (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Compatibility in table form?

Why two tables keyed off the same values (rather than one table with three columns)? And it's only for x64/32 plus x64/64 anyway. Actually, what is the point of a table at all, where all the entries are the same? Martin Kealey (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

64-bit version for Windows?

The article says "Lightning is available in 32-bit and 64-bit versions for Windows..." but The Lightning FTP site lists only "win32" and 'Bug 634180 - (ltn-win64) Provide 64-bit Windows package for Lightning' says there is no 64-bit version. -Lopifalko (talk)

Situation of Lightning is same as that of Thunderbird. 32-bit Mozilla applications (win32) can work perfectly on Win64 because of WoW64, the subsystem capable of running 32-bit applications. Native 64-bit Mozilla applications for Win64 (win64-x86_64) are available only as Nightly (currently, Thunderbird 29.0a1 and Lightning 3.1a1). --Claw of Slime (talk) 16:33, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. At the top of this article should it instead say that it is compatible with 32-bit and 64-bit Windows, rather than that there is a 64-bit version (generally) available? Or go further and say it is a 32-bit version that runs on 32-bit or 64-bit Windows? I don't think it needs to mention Nightly as that is obscure for most readers. -Lopifalko (talk)

At the moment most Mozilla applications (including Firefox, Thunderbird and, when the build computers are up, SeaMonkey) are produced as follows:

• Windows: 32-bit only, but also runs in 64-bit OS with WoW64
• Linux: Separate 32- and 64-bit versions, but the 64-bit version is sometimes harder to find depending on how the "download pages" are written for that particular program
• Mac: Single "Universal Binary" .dmg including both 32-bit and 64-bit executables. Everyone installs the same version, and the OS selects the best executable that it can run. IIUC Mac users will have to install either a 32-bit or a 64-bit .xpi of Lightning.

The article currently mentions "…32-bit and 64-bit versions for Windows, OS X and Linux." This isn't really false, if it is understood that some versions are 32-bit and others are 64-bit, and that they are targeted at current Windows, Linux and Mac OS X operating systems. You may or may not regard it as useful to break it down on the content page as I did it above; but note that this is subject to change together with the hardware, software and fleshware of Mozilla (the latter because compiling 64-bit binaries successfully may require changes to the source, and someone has to write those changes)

Tonymec (talk) 19:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

External links to Mozilla Add-ons pages

I intentionally removed /en/thunderbird/ from the URL to https://addons.mozilla.org. They will be added back by a redirect, but customized depending on your browser and language, so that, for instance, if you click the link in a German version of SeaMonkey, you'll get …/de/seamonkey/… instead. Tonymec (talk) 18:44, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lightning (software). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100619234903/http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/2010/06/lightning_10_beta_2_and_compat.html to http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/calendar/2010/06/lightning_10_beta_2_and_compat.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:46, 15 May 2017 (UTC)