Papercuts: status and a top 10 list from the wiki

Wayne Mery (d531) vseerror at Lehigh.EDU
Thu Dec 27 21:06:39 UTC 2012

On 7/30/2012 3:20 PM, Kent James wrote:
> On 7/30/2012 7:11 AM, Mike Conley wrote:
>> Thanks Kent, for doing this.
>>> So there you have it, my top 10 list! I will be championing these bugs,
>>> and I urge others (in the spirit of cooperation with the project and the
>>> community) to also champion these bugs in the short run.
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the plan that each committed
>> papercut-fixer was going to get 5 bugs to work on and complete in < 1
>> year?
> Yes, but ...
> 1) We don't really have a viable process yet to choose "official"
> papercut bugs. The first attempt using a wiki is awkward, yet I wanted
> to take what I could to do a start to an "official" papercuts list so
> that we could get started. We have awhile to fill in with additional bugs.
> 2) With future TB 17 ESR now in comm-central, this is a critical time
> for all of us to push bugs that we know need to be landed, while the
> papercuts bug timescale is a little longer.
> 3) It is really important to me that we effectively engage with the
> broader Thunderbird community to get key issues identified, brought to
> the attention of developers, and solved. We need to figure out a way to
> get the key contributors in BMO and GS engaged in this. Some are, but
> there are some noticable gaps.
> So this list is a compromise between "let's get going" and "leave some
> room for additional bugs with a better process".
> rkent
> _______________________________________________
> tb-planning mailing list
> tb-planning at

As previously mentioned, I hope papercuts is just dormant and not dead. 
First, a recap:
* jcranmer created
* there was discussion on tb-planning
* wayne created
* there was discussion on tb-planning
* there was the summit in Warsaw [1]
* dormancy

Coming out of Warsaw I believe the plan was to revisit the ideas for 
papercuts and "the list". Shall we begin?

"The list" is I think a qualified success, as suggested by ludo and as 
defined by "bugs on the list are getting fixed" (see "the list version 
2").  I therefore have taken a second cut at "the list".

Papercuts on the other hand has languished, I think because of the ramp 
up to Warsaw and getting TB17 out the door, and the fact that very few 
people have marked tb-papercuts in bugzilla.

Papercuts' goals and process, as defined on the wiki, are worthy and I 
believe should be driven forward. Yes, there are process deficiencies 
previously discussed - for example lack of real voting process and 
integration to bugzilla, and lack of accessibility to the common 
man/woman.  None of these issues are fixable given our current level of 
organization and volunteer commitment.  But it's a light weight process, 
better than nothing, and there is (or was) substantial enthusiasm for 
the goals which might be summed up as, take a bug that some (informed?) 
group of people really cares about and fix it.  Eight people quickly 
signed up to be on the fixing end of the effort of the 78 nominations. 
Indeed a few bugs got fixed, but very few bugs were "adopted" and then 
we somehow got lost [2].

Next point ... it has been suggested that "the list" can be a 
replacement for papercuts. I disagree. "The list", as I have created it, 
is based largely on bugs with stability and dataloss potential, plus a 
small number of severe usability issues - for example bugs 66806, 
487386, 511741, 522222.  (and, as I am not "all wise", there no doubt 
some bugs that shouldn't be on the current list)

Further, papercuts are mostly nuanced usage issues. I don't see papercut 
bugs surfacing organically via bugzilla or one person, or even a small 
group (unless we return to the system of "wanted" flags in bugzilla). 
Plus the mindset was it should be a list of bugs generated "by the 
people", versus a developer driven bug fix list. After all,  one of 
major complaints of the post-TB2 era is not enough bug fixes driven via 
user input.  (A complaint I don't entirely share, but I'm just one 
datapoint. Regardless, post-tb2 bug fixing was in fact informed by user 
input via thunderbird nomination flags. Whether the process worked well 
is a different matter.)

I think what's on the wiki that jcranmer started is highly usable in the 
near term.  And so I hope most everyone agrees papercuts is not and 
should not be dead. Better yet, I hope many of you make positive steps 
up to make it a working process!  Mark your nominated and voted bug 
tb-papercut in bugzilla - I've done mine.

As a parting related comment, is kent's top 
10 from a previous post, in buglist form.

[1] Warsaw, relavent comments from - as posted on tb-planning:
- "Thunderbird projects and roadmaps" jcranmer 9/11/2012
- "Summary of TB QA Meeting at Mozcamp" mconley 9/11/2012
Action items
* Get a list of people watching each TB component, and make sure we've 
got somebody with eyes on each one.
* We're going to tackle the Papercuts list (10 bugs) to prove that we 
can deal with a list.
* rkent(?) is going to send out a weekly status report on the Papercuts 
list, and what needs fixing, on what got fixed.
* When the list is empty, or close to being empty, QA is going to 
develop a process for creating the list (which includes the facility for 
devs to indicate that a bug is too difficult).
* We need to come up with some critiera for choosing bugs like the ones 
on Papercuts. Then QA / Support will build the list.

[2] Papercuts, partial analysis (I stopped after examining 20 bugs at 
bug 11039 because 78 is too many to review):

78 nominated
38 voted and should be tb-papercut in bugzilla but only 6 are marked

of the 20 I reviewed...
  2  not marked papercut, but fixed - Bug 450302 Bug 650170
  2  marked papercut + fixed - Bug 349547 Bug 739311
  1  not marked but assigned/worked Bug 92165
  15 not marked+not worked = NSA (no significant activity)

More information about the tb-planning mailing list