Regressions in TB 31.x and 33

Kent James kent at
Thu Oct 23 19:28:31 UTC 2014

On 10/23/2014 9:55 AM, Wayne Mery (Thunderbird QA) wrote:
> On 10/23/2014 12:24 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
>> On 23/10/14 17:14, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>>> Sadly, none of these bugs show any significant activity. Two years ago
>>>> Mozilla announced that TB would not receive any more active 
>>>> development
>>>> of new features.
>>> You have encountered some bug s that actually prove that your last
>>> comment is not true.
>>> The Addressing bugs are due to some significant movement on getting the
>>> Composer rewrite going. This is a very *good* thing.
>> Well yes, but it doesn't make the bugs less painful. While I don't want
>> to diss anyone doing this hard work, taking it on also means taking on
>> responsibility for quickly addressing regressions you cause. I've also
>> seen some of these bugs; are they being worked on?
>> Gerv
> I'm not the person doing it, but yes they are getting attention. The 
> question is, are all the right ones getting the most attention.  My 
> personal expectation is that the worst ones get fixed in the next 
> point release.

It is true that significant regressions in Thunderbird 31 were not 
getting sufficient visibility until fairly recently. We've been working 
to change that, and just today talked about what they were, and when we 
could do a point release that addressed all known serious issues. So yes 
we are now working hard on getting them attention.

"are all the right ones getting the most attention" is the right 
question. There is a sense that "autocomplete" has regressions but not a 
clear sense of which are the specific bugs for that. The spellcheck and 
userchrome bug have no visibility.

Didn't we used to have some flags that people could nominate to block 
the next release? How are people supposed to nominate bugs as needing 
serious attention in the current release?


More information about the tb-planning mailing list