Papercuts remixed (was Re: What's the status of papercuts?)

Kent James kent at
Wed Jul 11 15:22:43 UTC 2012

On 7/11/2012 3:19 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2012-07-10 11:37 PM, Kent James <kent at> wrote:
> ...
>> But let me propose an idea. What if we were to make a list of
>> well-recognized bugs (not enhancements) in Thunderbird, and make that
>> the focus of an initial effort for the developer community that is
>> starting to gel around Thunderbird?...
> I love this idea, and think it would go well with a bug bounty system 
> - as you pointed out, since fixing bugs isn't really considered the 
> sexiest aspect of programming, this would provide a different incentive.
> Also, I'd suggest adding something like a 'Bug Wrangler Heros' page, 
> where people who successfully tackle these long standing bugs would be 
> honored - these pages should be long lived (Mozilla should promise to 
> maintain them as long as they are relevant), so that these devs could 
> use these pages in their resumes if they wanted...
These kinds of things don't motivate me, don't know about others. But it 
is hard for me to picture someone like mconley or jcranmer being 
motivated by that, and those are the type of people that we need to fix 
these kinds of bugs. But I could be persuaded if this is motivating to 

>> So as an example, we could develop a list of 100 Thunderbird bugs that
>> at least 3 people are willing to vouch for ...
> Personally, I think 100 is too many, at least to start with. I say 
> this because the usual reason given that a long standing bug is long 
> standing, is because it is a big job that requires a lot of work to 
> fix (properly).
> So, I'd suggest starting with a much lower number (10?), and look for 
> someone who can manage them properly (coordinate the people willing to 
> take them on, divide the bug into sub bugs, etc)...
You may be right. But the impressions that you get from the more 
negative people is that there are lots of long-neglected bugs that are 
simple one line changes, but I also know from my own experience looking 
over lists of bugs with lots of bz votes that those are actually quite 
hard to find. But I myself could do 5 difficult bugs per year, so the 
number that we choose is partly determined by the number of people who 
are willing to count themselves in for the effort.
>> Count me in, if other people are also willing to be involved.
> Not sure what you mean by 'vouching' above, but if you mean 
> testing/confirming bugs (and testing fixes, although I can't create my 
> own builds), I'm happy to help with that.
My term "vouching" was meant to represent the process of selecting which 
bugs you think need fixing, and adding your "voucher" to some number of 
those. I meant it as a plural term for the noun "vote". That is an 
important process, and I would welcome your participation, but at this 
point in time I think that we need to get some committed developers to 
lead some credibility to the effort. The people with negative attitudes 
(and haven't we all been there at some point?) need some convincing that 
this is a serious effort.


More information about the tb-planning mailing list