Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

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

Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

dolphinling-2
There are currently 1913 open bugs in the Mozilla Application Suite
product that are marked as enhancements and don't have a target
milestone of Seamonkey-blah. My guess is that most of these should be
moved to Firefox or Thunderbird.

Should there be some sort of organized effort to go through these,
perhaps a bugday?
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

Tim Riley-3
dolphinling wrote:
> There are currently 1913 open bugs in the Mozilla Application Suite
> product that are marked as enhancements and don't have a target
> milestone of Seamonkey-blah. My guess is that most of these should be
> moved to Firefox or Thunderbird.
>
> Should there be some sort of organized effort to go through these,
> perhaps a bugday?
I am not sure what the right forum for that would be.  It seems
reasonable to roll these into Seamonkey, but that is up to the seamonkey
community to address.  Some of them could be rolled into Firefox or
Thunderbird.  That should probably be handled by the various module owners.

Feel free to join us at tomorrow's bug day (Tues May 23rd, 12-4pm PST,
IRC #qa) to discuss this as a future topic.  See the bug day site for
more details:

        http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_QA_Community:Bug_Day

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

Re: Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

Andrew Schultz-2
In reply to this post by dolphinling-2
dolphinling wrote:
> There are currently 1913 open bugs in the Mozilla Application Suite
> product that are marked as enhancements and don't have a target
> milestone of Seamonkey-blah. My guess is that most of these should be
> moved to Firefox or Thunderbird.

These probably fall into one of the following categories:

1. Good idea, file a new bug in Firefox or Thunderbird product, make a
comment in the original bug.
2. Not a good idea, do nothing.
3. Already fixed in Firefox or Thunderbird, do nothing.
4. Bug already exists in Firefox or Thunderbird, do nothing.
5. Bug actually belongs in Toolkit or Core (move it!)
6. Bad idea, will get WONTFIXed, but let module own do it
7. Duplicate

My guess would be that many of the RFEs fall into #2.  Things that might
be more appropriate as an extension.

--
Andrew Schultz
[hidden email]
http://www.sens.buffalo.edu/~ajs42/
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

dolphinling-2
Andrew Schultz wrote:

> dolphinling wrote:
>> There are currently 1913 open bugs in the Mozilla Application Suite
>> product that are marked as enhancements and don't have a target
>> milestone of Seamonkey-blah. My guess is that most of these should be
>> moved to Firefox or Thunderbird.
>
> These probably fall into one of the following categories:
>
> 1. Good idea, file a new bug in Firefox or Thunderbird product, make a
> comment in the original bug.

Why not move it? My guess is that any RFE filed before Firefox and
Thunderbird became default was intended for "the browser you make", not
"the suite, specifically". Personally I've been moving any important to me

> 2. Not a good idea, do nothing.
> 3. Already fixed in Firefox or Thunderbird, do nothing.

I think there should be a keyword, or at least a semi-standard status
whiteboard noting this, so it's obvious the bug is intended for seamonkey.

> 4. Bug already exists in Firefox or Thunderbird, do nothing.

Should probably note what the bug number is, in the status whiteboard.
It will be nice for anyone looking at the bug to see, could help the
original author find it if they now use Fx/Tb, and could help at least
in non-UI specific parts for people fixing them to compare work.
Actually, bug number should probably be noted for #3, as well.

> 5. Bug actually belongs in Toolkit or Core (move it!)
> 6. Bad idea, will get WONTFIXed, but let module own do it

What's the difference between 6 and 2?

> 7. Duplicate

There's an 8th category here, much more prevalent than you might think:
Bug already fixed in Fx/Tb AND Seamonkey.

> My guess would be that many of the RFEs fall into #2.  Things that might
> be more appropriate as an extension.

Actually, having looked through the list, a surprisingly large number of
them are still relevant and worthwhile. I don't know if it's over 50%,
but it's a lot.


One last thing, I was noticing that near the end there's a lot more
actually-seamonkey bugs. Perhaps if there's any effort it should
concentrate on bugs filed before Firefox 1.0 came out, i.e. bugs
numbered < 274000
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

Andrew Schultz-2
dolphinling wrote:

> Andrew Schultz wrote:
>> dolphinling wrote:
>>> There are currently 1913 open bugs in the Mozilla Application Suite
>>> product that are marked as enhancements and don't have a target
>>> milestone of Seamonkey-blah. My guess is that most of these should be
>>> moved to Firefox or Thunderbird.
>>
>> These probably fall into one of the following categories:
>>
>> 1. Good idea, file a new bug in Firefox or Thunderbird product, make a
>> comment in the original bug.
>
> Why not move it? My guess is that any RFE filed before Firefox and

Because SeaMonkey is a project of its own, uses bugzilla.m.o and uses
the (now inappropriately named) "Mozilla Application Suite" product for
its bugs?  RFEs are not really any different than other bugs.  A good
chunk of them were reported in Mozilla and persist in Firefox/Tbird.
But that doesn't mean they should be moved.

>> 2. Not a good idea, do nothing.
>> 3. Already fixed in Firefox or Thunderbird, do nothing.
>
> I think there should be a keyword, or at least a semi-standard status
> whiteboard noting this, so it's obvious the bug is intended for seamonkey.

That's what the Mozilla App Suite product is for (at this point).
SeaMonkey bugs.

>> 4. Bug already exists in Firefox or Thunderbird, do nothing.
>
> Should probably note what the bug number is, in the status whiteboard.
> It will be nice for anyone looking at the bug to see, could help the
> original author find it if they now use Fx/Tb, and could help at least
> in non-UI specific parts for people fixing them to compare work.
> Actually, bug number should probably be noted for #3, as well.

sure.

>> 5. Bug actually belongs in Toolkit or Core (move it!)
>> 6. Bad idea, will get WONTFIXed, but let module own do it
>
> What's the difference between 6 and 2?

#2 is like "View quirks mode details."  (bug 192549)
A small segment of normal people think it's a good idea, but it's
unlikely it will ever be implemented, in part because a dev is more
likely to work on other bugs.  A good patch might be accepted.
In the current context, probably not worth the time/effort of filing a
new bug unless you yourself think it's a good idea (in which case it's
actually category #1).

#6 is "Add anti-Microsoft propaganda graphics to the installer to
display during installation."

>> 7. Duplicate
>
> There's an 8th category here, much more prevalent than you might think:
> Bug already fixed in Fx/Tb AND Seamonkey.

absolutely.  But then they'd be duplicates.  ;)

--
Andrew Schultz
[hidden email]
http://www.sens.buffalo.edu/~ajs42/
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

Frank Wein
In reply to this post by dolphinling-2
dolphinling wrote:
> Andrew Schultz wrote:
>> dolphinling wrote:
>>> There are currently 1913 open bugs in the Mozilla Application Suite
>>> product that are marked as enhancements and don't have a target
>>> milestone of Seamonkey-blah. My guess is that most of these should be
>>> moved to Firefox or Thunderbird.
>>
>> These probably fall into one of the following categories:
[...]
>> 2. Not a good idea, do nothing.
[...]
>> 5. Bug actually belongs in Toolkit or Core (move it!)
>> 6. Bad idea, will get WONTFIXed, but let module own do it
>
> What's the difference between 6 and 2?

2 can be done by anyone (ignore the bug), 6 can/should only be done by
module owner or his peers ;-). The problem is some module owners are not
very active looking at bugs and bug triage in those modules is mostly
done by other people (who should not WONTFIX bugs). Also some people
seem to take a WONTFIX very serious and then want to discuss the WONTFIX
with you in many, many mails. This is sometimes not what a module owner
wants to do :). A discussion over a few mails is ok, but some Bug
reporters send mails over and over and this mostly ends up in pointless
discussions.

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

Re: Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

dolphinling-2
In reply to this post by Andrew Schultz-2
Andrew Schultz wrote:

> dolphinling wrote:
>> Andrew Schultz wrote:
>>> dolphinling wrote:
>>>> There are currently 1913 open bugs in the Mozilla Application Suite
>>>> product that are marked as enhancements and don't have a target
>>>> milestone of Seamonkey-blah. My guess is that most of these should
>>>> be moved to Firefox or Thunderbird.
>>>
>>> These probably fall into one of the following categories:
>>>
>>> 1. Good idea, file a new bug in Firefox or Thunderbird product, make
>>> a comment in the original bug.
>>
>> Why not move it? My guess is that any RFE filed before Firefox and
>
> Because SeaMonkey is a project of its own, uses bugzilla.m.o and uses
> the (now inappropriately named) "Mozilla Application Suite" product for
> its bugs?  RFEs are not really any different than other bugs.  A good
> chunk of them were reported in Mozilla and persist in Firefox/Tbird. But
> that doesn't mean they should be moved.

But that means that mozilla.org internal reorganization messed up their
bug report. They reported it for "the browser you make", and would
expect it to stay filed in "the browser you make", even if the name and
codebase of that browser changes.
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Mozilla Application Suite enhancement bugs

Andrew Schultz-2
dolphinling wrote:
> But that means that mozilla.org internal reorganization messed up their
> bug report. They reported it for "the browser you make", and would
> expect it to stay filed in "the browser you make", even if the name and
> codebase of that browser changes.

mozilla.org still "makes" SeaMonkey in that SeaMonkey project is part of
mozilla.org.  It's not part of mozilla.com and is not one of Mozilla's
premiere app, but I don't know how any of that is relevant.

--
Andrew Schultz
[hidden email]
http://www.sens.buffalo.edu/~ajs42/
_______________________________________________
dev-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-quality