Bug 541876

Kent James 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" 
response, etc.

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...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/tb-planning/attachments/20120730/8ebbabea/attachment.html>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list