<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 2005-05-14 Trunk builds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/</link>
	<description>Developments in nightly builds of Mozilla Firefox</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 19:17:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: FT</title>
		<link>http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/comment-page-1/#comment-2275</link>
		<dc:creator>FT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2005 21:09:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/#comment-2275</guid>
		<description>Hey guys, how is it possible that I can&#039;t install any new version of Firefox? Is there any problem?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey guys, how is it possible that I can&#8217;t install any new version of Firefox? Is there any problem?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jesse Ruderman</title>
		<link>http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/comment-page-1/#comment-2267</link>
		<dc:creator>Jesse Ruderman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2005 02:38:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/#comment-2267</guid>
		<description>I noticed that some of the holes fixed for Firefox 1.0.3 were missing in trunk, but I didn&#039;t take the time to figure out which ones.

What is the impact of 292589 on Firefox?  On Thunderbird?  (Answer by email if you want.)

I didn&#039;t see any crashers with many votes in the list of fastback bugs, and I didn&#039;t see any topcrashers, so I didn&#039;t include them in my list.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I noticed that some of the holes fixed for Firefox 1.0.3 were missing in trunk, but I didn&#8217;t take the time to figure out which ones.</p>
<p>What is the impact of 292589 on Firefox?  On Thunderbird?  (Answer by email if you want.)</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t see any crashers with many votes in the list of fastback bugs, and I didn&#8217;t see any topcrashers, so I didn&#8217;t include them in my list.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boris</title>
		<link>http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/comment-page-1/#comment-2266</link>
		<dc:creator>Boris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2005 15:18:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.squarefree.com/burningedge/2005/05/15/2005-05-14-trunk-builds/#comment-2266</guid>
		<description>&gt; # Fixed: All security bugs that were fixed for Firefox 1.0.4.

Er... Except the ones that were fixed for Firefox 1.0.3, of course...

&gt; # Fixed: 292589 - Security hole, might not affect Firefox.

It affects Firefox.

&gt; Most serious fastback bugs:

Interesting choices.  I&#039;d have picked the potential crashers and such as more serious.... ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; # Fixed: All security bugs that were fixed for Firefox 1.0.4.</p>
<p>Er&#8230; Except the ones that were fixed for Firefox 1.0.3, of course&#8230;</p>
<p>&gt; # Fixed: 292589 &#8211; Security hole, might not affect Firefox.</p>
<p>It affects Firefox.</p>
<p>&gt; Most serious fastback bugs:</p>
<p>Interesting choices.  I&#8217;d have picked the potential crashers and such as more serious&#8230;. ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

