Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Dave Yeo-3
I see all the open OS/2 bugs at bugzilla were closed this morning as
won't fix
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Lars Erdmann
So what ?

They also closed mine:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=707864

But looking at the github code from BWW I can see that:
1) this problem is fixed
2) the code looks substantially different now

We have our own bugtracker at the BWW github and all these OS/2 bugs at
bugzilla are just too old to be useful today.

Also, not all OS/2 related bugs are closed, see here:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=OS%2F2

Maybe it would be a good idea to move these remaining bugs (it's just 21
bugs) to the github BWW bugtracker if they are still relevant.



Lars


Am 01.07.16 um 17.17 schrieb Dave Yeo:
> I see all the open OS/2 bugs at bugzilla were closed this morning as
> won't fix
> Dave

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Steve Wendt
On 7/1/2016 1:13 PM, Lars Erdmann wrote:

> So what ?

It's just reinforcing the fact that Mozilla for OS/2 is considered dead.
  It's nice that we have the bitwise fork, but it's unfortunate that it
happened.  It's part of the same mentality that pushed Firefox so
heavily, followed by driving down the market share of it with a myriad
of "we know best" decisions.  The spirit of community support is not
what it used to be...

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Lars Erdmann
Am 01.07.16 um 23.39 schrieb Steve Wendt:

> On 7/1/2016 1:13 PM, Lars Erdmann wrote:
>
>> So what ?
>
> It's just reinforcing the fact that Mozilla for OS/2 is considered dead.
>   It's nice that we have the bitwise fork, but it's unfortunate that it
> happened.  It's part of the same mentality that pushed Firefox so
> heavily, followed by driving down the market share of it with a myriad
> of "we know best" decisions.  The spirit of community support is not
> what it used to be...
>

Particularly in that case, I consider the bitwise fork to be a great
advantage rather than a drawback. It gives the OS/2 community much
better control of getting the OS/2 specific bugs fixed.

The one problem is that Firefox now has an absurdingly short update
cycle. Just as so many other products because of the ability to update
over the internet ...



Lars

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Dave Yeo-3
Lars Erdmann wrote:

> Am 01.07.16 um 23.39 schrieb Steve Wendt:
>> On 7/1/2016 1:13 PM, Lars Erdmann wrote:
>>
>>> So what ?
>>
>> It's just reinforcing the fact that Mozilla for OS/2 is considered dead.
>>   It's nice that we have the bitwise fork, but it's unfortunate that it
>> happened.  It's part of the same mentality that pushed Firefox so
>> heavily, followed by driving down the market share of it with a myriad
>> of "we know best" decisions.  The spirit of community support is not
>> what it used to be...
>>
>
> Particularly in that case, I consider the bitwise fork to be a great
> advantage rather than a drawback. It gives the OS/2 community much
> better control of getting the OS/2 specific bugs fixed.

On the other hand, there is no review process, which I've often watched
improve even good programmers code. It does slow things down.

>
> The one problem is that Firefox now has an absurdingly short update
> cycle. Just as so many other products because of the ability to update
> over the internet ...

This is the killer, it would probably be a full time job keeping our
code current and now the Mozilla developers have been banned from even
considering TB and SM, little well 3rd tier platforms.
Dave

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Steve Wendt
In reply to this post by Lars Erdmann
On 07/02/2016 12:54 AM, Lars Erdmann wrote:

> I consider the bitwise fork to be a great advantage rather than a
> drawback.

The biggest drawback is that it will always be behind.

> It gives the OS/2 community much better control of getting the OS/2
> specific bugs fixed.

No more than before...

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Dave Yeo-3
Steve Wendt wrote:
> On 07/02/2016 12:54 AM, Lars Erdmann wrote:
>
>> I consider the bitwise fork to be a great advantage rather than a
>> drawback.
>
> The biggest drawback is that it will always be behind.

Also as it makes such huge leaps, bisecting the tree to find a commit
that introduced a crash is not possible.

>
>> It gives the OS/2 community much better control of getting the OS/2
>> specific bugs fixed.
>
> No more than before...
>

Actually worse as Bitwise has been resistant to TB and SM related fixes,
eg currently their tree is not quite up to date and is missing the last
couple of commits for TB 38.8.0 and I couldn't convince them to update
it past the FF38.8.0 tag. If I had the bandwidth, I could fork their
fork but as it stands... Luckily those last commits don't seem to affect
us but still nice to have the tree include the official TB38.8.0 release tag
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Lars Erdmann
In reply to this post by Steve Wendt
Am 03.07.16 um 02.22 schrieb Steve Wendt:
> On 07/02/2016 12:54 AM, Lars Erdmann wrote:
>
>> I consider the bitwise fork to be a great advantage rather than a
>> drawback.
>
> The biggest drawback is that it will always be behind.

So what ? Not every new version proves to be better than an older
version. This is even true for security related fixes.


>
>> It gives the OS/2 community much better control of getting the OS/2
>> specific bugs fixed.
>
> No more than before...
>

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mass closing of OS/2 bugs

Cameron Kaiser-2
In reply to this post by Steve Wendt
On 7/2/16 5:22 PM, Steve Wendt wrote:
>> It gives the OS/2 community much better control of getting the OS/2
>> specific bugs fixed.
>
> No more than before...

I'd argue it does, but only insofar as fixes aren't subject to Mozilla
review. This has helped a lot with TenFourFox because I've been able to
make changes that would almost certainly be unacceptable in the actual
source tree. I only upstream my changes that are relevant to PowerPC on
other platforms.

Cameron Kaiser
tier-3s in rain dept.

_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2