kent at caspia.com
Mon Jul 30 19:58:35 UTC 2012
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* <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=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"
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
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?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tb-planning