Bug 541876
12 views
Skip to first unread message
Andy G
Jul 29, 2012, 5:05:58 PM7/29/12
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
Hi. I am wondering if there are any plans to address this bug
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541876
in future versions of Thunderbird?
This is seriously broken functionality and as has been commented on in the bug report it nearly renders tabs useless. This bug has been active for several years and has been duplicated many times.
I would be willing to take time for testing and possibly with code, although my code skills lie elsewhere. I do have a small computer shop with a variety of boxes/OS here to test on, however due to work schedule would not necessarily be very punctual :-(
Much appreciation for what is to me the best email client ever written. Lets keep making it better :-)
Andy Grosland
Spearfish, SD
This is seriously broken functionality and as has been commented on in the bug report it nearly renders tabs useless. This bug has been active for several years and has been duplicated many times.
I would be willing to take time for testing and possibly with code, although my code skills lie elsewhere. I do have a small computer shop with a variety of boxes/OS here to test on, however due to work schedule would not necessarily be very punctual :-(
Much appreciation for what is to me the best email client ever written. Lets keep making it better :-)
Andy Grosland
Spearfish, SD
--
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
New Quantum Particle: Hangerons, whose wave function collapses according to the observer's political bias.
If Wishes were Fishes, Fish would be extinct.
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
New Quantum Particle: Hangerons, whose wave function collapses according to the observer's political bias.
If Wishes were Fishes, Fish would be extinct.
Kent James
Jul 30, 2012, 3:58:35 PM7/30/12
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
On 7/29/2012 2:05 PM, Andy G wrote:
Hi. I am wondering if there are any plans to address this bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541876 in future versions of Thunderbird?
The bug that you listed is a SeaMonkey bug. I believe that the
equivalent bug for Thunderbird is:
Bug 487386
That bug has everything permitted within Bugzilla to scream for attention:
[ux-papercut], [gs], [UXprio], 25 dups, 52 votes, major importance, wanted-thunderbird, user whine with official "do not whine in BMO" response, etc.
Yet unfortunately the answer to your question is "there are no plans to address this bug".
Personally I think this is a travesty, and it is bugs like that that get me motivated to improve our general qc process. Looking at the papercuts list, I nominated it as a bug, but only got one supporter for that, so it did not make the official first list. What we really need is a group process that we actually use to choose bugs to work on where important stakeholds in Thunderbird have the opportunity to influence which problems get addressed.
There are existing processes in both BMO and gs that attempt to do this. I don't really understand why those processes are not used in a more effective way to influence development. People have followed our process, this bug is easily a top 5 bug we should be looking at, yet we don't.
Perhaps others who have been more involved for the last few years while I have been off in addon land can give a better answer to this. But let's look to the future, what can we change to better address these types of bugs?
rkent
Bug 487386
That bug has everything permitted within Bugzilla to scream for attention:
[ux-papercut], [gs], [UXprio], 25 dups, 52 votes, major importance, wanted-thunderbird, user whine with official "do not whine in BMO" response, etc.
Yet unfortunately the answer to your question is "there are no plans to address this bug".
Personally I think this is a travesty, and it is bugs like that that get me motivated to improve our general qc process. Looking at the papercuts list, I nominated it as a bug, but only got one supporter for that, so it did not make the official first list. What we really need is a group process that we actually use to choose bugs to work on where important stakeholds in Thunderbird have the opportunity to influence which problems get addressed.
There are existing processes in both BMO and gs that attempt to do this. I don't really understand why those processes are not used in a more effective way to influence development. People have followed our process, this bug is easily a top 5 bug we should be looking at, yet we don't.
Perhaps others who have been more involved for the last few years while I have been off in addon land can give a better answer to this. But let's look to the future, what can we change to better address these types of bugs?
rkent
Mark Banner
Jul 31, 2012, 5:17:06 AM7/31/12
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
On 30/07/2012 20:58, Kent James wrote:
Bug 487386
That bug has everything permitted within Bugzilla to scream for attention:
[ux-papercut], [gs], [UXprio], 25 dups, 52 votes, major importance, wanted-thunderbird, user whine with official "do not whine in BMO" response, etc.
Yes, I'd agree it is a paper-cut bug.
Yet unfortunately the answer to your question is "there are no plans to address this bug".
Not quite true. We have discussed routes to improving Thunderbird
which would also result in fixing this issue. They aren't simple and
involve a big reworking of the way the main window UI works.
The SeaMonkey "ugly proof of concept" is an interesting work around, although I'd be concerned that it could be fragile in itself. It also wouldn't fix some of the other related issues of feed pages/messages being reloading, text selection and focus.
Now I think about it, I don't think I've actually written down the direction I was originally thinking of going, so I'll do that and post it separately, as it isn't just related to fixing that specific bug.
The fundamental problem is that currently all message display tabs are using the same "messagepane" element (as well as other elements) - there's various assumptions all through the UI code that it exists, or that there's just one of them. This is also why we can't close the main 3-pane tab at the moment.
To fix that is quite a lot of work, but I'll let you see that from the route I was proposing when I post it.
The SeaMonkey "ugly proof of concept" is an interesting work around, although I'd be concerned that it could be fragile in itself. It also wouldn't fix some of the other related issues of feed pages/messages being reloading, text selection and focus.
Now I think about it, I don't think I've actually written down the direction I was originally thinking of going, so I'll do that and post it separately, as it isn't just related to fixing that specific bug.
The fundamental problem is that currently all message display tabs are using the same "messagepane" element (as well as other elements) - there's various assumptions all through the UI code that it exists, or that there's just one of them. This is also why we can't close the main 3-pane tab at the moment.
To fix that is quite a lot of work, but I'll let you see that from the route I was proposing when I post it.
Personally I think this is a travesty, and it is bugs like that that get me motivated to improve our general qc process. Looking at the papercuts list, I nominated it as a bug, but only got one supporter for that, so it did not make the official first list. What we really need is a group process that we actually use to choose bugs to work on where important stakeholds in Thunderbird have the opportunity to influence which problems get addressed.
There's an important additional factor - the amount of work a
papercut requires to fix. Whilst you can say it is important, if it
will take a year of someone's work to fix, then maybe it isn't such
a good choice, unless you are getting lots of user complaints (afaik
we're generally just seeing them in bugzilla for this bug, and not
on gs, but I've not looked myself).
The group process is much more interesting, and we should use the change of release & governance discussions to work out what we want there. Obviously we can't get everyone to work on just the bugs we want, but exploring that group process is something I'd like to see.
The group process is much more interesting, and we should use the change of release & governance discussions to work out what we want there. Obviously we can't get everyone to work on just the bugs we want, but exploring that group process is something I'd like to see.
There are existing processes in both BMO and gs that attempt to do this. I don't really understand why those processes are not used in a more effective way to influence development. People have followed our process, this bug is easily a top 5 bug we should be looking at, yet we don't.
It is always a balance of the bugs/features/time/visibility. In this
case, I'd say that time to fix has been outweighing the others, and
whilst it is visible to the users, it doesn't seem to cause the
level of complaints that other bugs do.
Mark.
Mark.
Karsten Düsterloh
Jul 31, 2012, 5:33:16 AM7/31/12
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
Mark Banner wrote:
> The SeaMonkey "ugly proof of concept"
> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541876#c1> is an
> The SeaMonkey "ugly proof of concept"
> interesting work around, although I'd be concerned that it could be
> fragile in itself. It also wouldn't fix some of the other related issues
> of feed pages/messages being reloading, text selection and focus.
…
> fragile in itself. It also wouldn't fix some of the other related issues
> of feed pages/messages being reloading, text selection and focus.
> The fundamental problem is that currently all message display tabs are
> using the same "messagepane" element (as well as other elements) -
> there's various assumptions all through the UI code that it exists, or
> that there's just one of them.
Yeah, exactly, and that's why I won't follow the road of that poc any
> using the same "messagepane" element (as well as other elements) -
> there's various assumptions all through the UI code that it exists, or
> that there's just one of them.
further. It's curing some issues with a giant lot of ducttape instead of
fixing the actual problem: have one message UI structure *per* *tab*.
Karsten
_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
tb-pl...@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning
Chris Ilias
Jul 30, 2012, 4:04:14 PM7/30/12
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
On 12-07-29 5:05 PM, Andy G wrote:
> Hi. I am wondering if there are any plans to address this bug
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541876 in future versions
> of Thunderbird?
>
> This is seriously broken functionality and as has been commented on in
> the bug report it nearly renders tabs useless. This bug has been active
> for several years and has been duplicated many times.
>
> I would be willing to take time for testing and possibly with code,
> although my code skills lie elsewhere. I do have a small computer shop
> with a variety of boxes/OS here to test on, however due to work schedule
> would not necessarily be very punctual :-(
>
> Much appreciation for what is to me the best email client ever
> written. Lets keep making it better :-)
That bug is filed against SeaMonkey specifically. There is a Thunderbird
> Hi. I am wondering if there are any plans to address this bug
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541876 in future versions
> of Thunderbird?
>
> This is seriously broken functionality and as has been commented on in
> the bug report it nearly renders tabs useless. This bug has been active
> for several years and has been duplicated many times.
>
> I would be willing to take time for testing and possibly with code,
> although my code skills lie elsewhere. I do have a small computer shop
> with a variety of boxes/OS here to test on, however due to work schedule
> would not necessarily be very punctual :-(
>
> Much appreciation for what is to me the best email client ever
> written. Lets keep making it better :-)
equivalent at <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=487386>,
which is already on the papercuts list at
<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/Papercuts>.
If the code is shared, then bug 541876 should be marked as a dupe of
487386 and bug 487386 moved to mailnews core? If it's not shared code,
then bug 541876 doesn't apply to Thunderbird.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages