From mkanat at bugzilla.org Tue Dec 8 23:05:45 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:05:45 -0800 Subject: If You Used To Work On Bugzilla And No Longer Do... In-Reply-To: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> References: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B1EDBC9.8050301@bugzilla.org> On 12/08/2009 02:57 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote: > If you know that somebody who used to work on Bugzilla but is not on > this list, please forward them this email. Oh, actually, instead of that, just send me their email address and their name by direct email. That way we can avoid spamming the person with this email more than once. I'm already going to forward this to a fair number of old contributors myself. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From mkanat at bugzilla.org Tue Dec 8 23:01:40 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:01:40 -0800 Subject: If You Used To Work On Bugzilla And No Longer Do... In-Reply-To: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> References: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B1EDAD4.6080007@bugzilla.org> On 12/08/2009 02:57 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote: > I'm currently doing some historical research on the Bugzilla Project to > determine the cause of increases and decreases on the size of our > community. I will share the results with you soon, and the responses I > get here will be part of it. Oh, note though that won't be including any quotes from you in the results, publicly, without your explicit permission, so you're free to say anything to me, and you don't have to fear that your words will be published, made public in any way, or spread around to anyone else. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From mkanat at bugzilla.org Tue Dec 8 22:57:50 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:57:50 -0800 Subject: If You Used To Work On Bugzilla And No Longer Do... Message-ID: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> Hey there. I'd like to hear from people who used to work on Bugzilla (in any way--as contributors, documentors, reviewers, anything) but no longer do, or people who stopped working on Bugzilla at any point in the past (even if they do work on it again now). I want to know what you feel caused you to stop working on Bugzilla, whether it was an indvidiual thing, a collection of things over time, the overwhelming demands of other parts of life, etc. To avoid starting a flame war, please email me directly instead of responding here on the list. If there was *anything* that discouraged you from working on Bugzilla, even if it seems like a silly thing, I want to know about it. *Anything* is fair game. If you want to tell me that it was something that I did, and that you throw darts at my picture every night, you're absolutely welcome to. You can be offensive, angry, I don't care. What I want to know is what happened. If you just want to share your experiences of trying to contribute to Bugzilla and what went wrong (and what went right), I'd love to know that as well, even if you still are a contributor. If you know that somebody who used to work on Bugzilla but is not on this list, please forward them this email. I'm currently doing some historical research on the Bugzilla Project to determine the cause of increases and decreases on the size of our community. I will share the results with you soon, and the responses I get here will be part of it. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From gerv at mozilla.org Tue Dec 8 15:56:48 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 07:56:48 -0800 Subject: Fwd: REST APIs, and Tags In-Reply-To: References: <4B0FAAD5.1030003@mozilla.org> <4B0FCF0C.8010803@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: On 29/11/09 11:32, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote: > If everybody could add global keywords, then it wouldn't make sense to > separate keywords and the status whiteboard anymore. Well, some people use the status whiteboard for English text rather than tags. But you are right, we might be able to collapse that in too. Great! :-) Simplicity is a win for everyone. The status whiteboard, keywords, flags and now our current tag implementation are four attempts over the course of Bugzilla's life to get "tagging" (in the broad sense) right. We need to accept that all four attempts missed the mark in one way or another, and that the rest of the world has figured it out. > The reason we don't > let everybody edit keywords is that it would be much more difficult to > search for bugs based on them. Why would that be a problem in practice when it isn't that a problem on Twitter or Flickr or the many other sites which use tags? >>> And yes, it should be possible for someone else to do that search too. >>> tag=wibble&taguser=gerv at mozilla.org, or some better UI. So that searches >>> can be shared by just sending or posting a URL, without needing any >>> complicated internal Bugzilla system. > > Oh, this violates privacy. Other people should only be allowed to query > for personal things you agree to share, which is what we are doing > currently with shared searches. I wouldn't want people to know which > tags I'm using for such or such bugs without my consent. I think it's a matter of user expectation. Do we set up the expectation that the personal tags you add to a bug are themselves private information, or just not-displayed-by-default information? We have existing examples of both types in the codebase. For groups, the group names are secret if you aren't a member of the group. For flags, the flag names are not secret even if they can only be set on products you can't see. I don't think it's a necessity that personal tags being non-private would break user expectations. (Of course, the above suggestion would not allow people to see bugs they couldn't already see.) Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From tr1719 at freemail.hu Tue Dec 8 15:30:24 2009 From: tr1719 at freemail.hu (N. G.) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 16:30:24 +0100 (CET) Subject: Reach other bug descriptions Message-ID: Hi! On the bug page (show_bug.cgi?id=NNNNNN) i' d like to reach the informations of other bugs. Is it somehow possible? For example on show_bug.cgi?id=130908 from edit.html.tmpl i' d like to reach the "depends on informations" of bug #115222, can i somehow do it? I can reach the "depends on informations" of bug #130908 (which is the actual) in this way: [% FOREACH depbug = bug.${name} %] do what i want [% END %] >From here can i somehow reach these informations for bug #115222 ?? ----- 2) If maybe there' s no simple way, is there any way to reach these informations for the listed bugs on the "bug list page" (buglist.cgi?....) (possibly from table.html.tmpl) . Thank You for the answers. _______________________________________________________ http://iwiw.hu/app/2001434963 Ha szeretn?l t?rsat, de nem szereted a meglepet?seket. _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From mkanat at bugzilla.org Tue Dec 8 01:32:39 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:32:39 -0800 Subject: Hard Freeze Extension Message-ID: <4B1DACB7.6090403@bugzilla.org> Due to LpSolit being unavailable for most of last week, and there being a LOT of patches that are awaiting review for 3.6, we're extending the hard freeze date to December 18. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From szabgab at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 08:07:56 2009 From: szabgab at gmail.com (Gabor Szabo) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 10:07:56 +0200 Subject: Representing Bugzilla on FOSDEM and other events In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, there is a new mailing list for people who are interested in showing Perl and various Perl based projects such as Bugzilla on conferences, workshops, fairs and other events. We have an emerging wiki page to collect information about events and projects to be represented. Mailing list subscription information can also be found there: http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl5/index.cgi?events I'd be happy to see Bugzilla developers/users participate. Specifically FOSDEM is less than 2 months away and the Perl community has a stand there. I'd like to understand if there are going to be Bugzilla developers or heavy users who would like to promote Bugzilla on that stand or otherwise. regards ? Gabor -- Gabor Szabo ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? http://szabgab.com/ From fedrushkov at users.sourceforge.net Wed Dec 9 16:39:09 2009 From: fedrushkov at users.sourceforge.net (Vitaly Fedrushkov) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 21:39:09 +0500 Subject: Self introduction: Krzysztof Drewniak In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B1FD2AD.1040800@users.sourceforge.net> On 07.11.2009 8:04, Krzysztof Drewniak wrote: > I haven't figured out what I will be working on If you're fluent in Polish, you may contribute to Aviary.pl team: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams#aviary.pl Currently Polish is among endangered Bugzilla locales. Regards, Vitaly. _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From after.fallout at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 17:24:41 2009 From: after.fallout at gmail.com (Bill Barry) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:24:41 -0700 Subject: If You Used To Work On Bugzilla And No Longer Do... In-Reply-To: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> References: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B1FDD59.7050308@gmail.com> I haven't decided to stop working on Bugzilla, but my job responsibilities have shifted (and my personal life has ramped up some) and I am no longer actively working on it. I haven't looked at my bugmail for a while now or really done anything related to it other than vote on a bug here or there and read occasional emails with somewhat interesting subjects/first paragraphs. I guess that makes me someone who used to work on Bugzilla, but no longer does at the moment? I would personally put myself into a category of "sleeping on it" rather than stopped. I am sure there are others on this list with the same situation. I replied to the list instead of directly to ask if you want those of us in this situation to check in as well. Max Kanat-Alexander wrote: > Hey there. I'd like to hear from people who used to work on Bugzilla > (in any way--as contributors, documentors, reviewers, anything) but no > longer do, or people who stopped working on Bugzilla at any point in the > past (even if they do work on it again now). > > I want to know what you feel caused you to stop working on Bugzilla, > whether it was an indvidiual thing, a collection of things over time, > the overwhelming demands of other parts of life, etc. To avoid starting > a flame war, please email me directly instead of responding here on the > list. > > If there was *anything* that discouraged you from working on Bugzilla, > even if it seems like a silly thing, I want to know about it. *Anything* > is fair game. If you want to tell me that it was something that I did, > and that you throw darts at my picture every night, you're absolutely > welcome to. You can be offensive, angry, I don't care. What I want to > know is what happened. > > If you just want to share your experiences of trying to contribute to > Bugzilla and what went wrong (and what went right), I'd love to know > that as well, even if you still are a contributor. > > If you know that somebody who used to work on Bugzilla but is not on > this list, please forward them this email. > > I'm currently doing some historical research on the Bugzilla Project to > determine the cause of increases and decreases on the size of our > community. I will share the results with you soon, and the responses I > get here will be part of it. > > -Max > From bugreport at peshkin.net Wed Dec 9 17:31:59 2009 From: bugreport at peshkin.net (Joel Peshkin) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 09:31:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: If You Used To Work On Bugzilla And No Longer Do... In-Reply-To: <4B1EDAD4.6080007@bugzilla.org> References: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> <4B1EDAD4.6080007@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <33273.70.167.158.162.1260379919.squirrel@peshkin.net> I've been "less active" because the features that I need in my work have made it into releases and I no longer need to be introducing many changes to make Bugzilla work well for me so I have other priorities. To the entire team's credit... Bugzilla rocks pretty well without me having to add more to it. From lpsolit at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 19:37:14 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 20:37:14 +0100 Subject: Fwd: REST APIs, and Tags In-Reply-To: References: <4B0FAAD5.1030003@mozilla.org> <4B0FCF0C.8010803@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B1FFC6A.9020600@gmail.com> Le 08. 12. 09 16:56, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > Well, some people use the status whiteboard for English text rather than > tags. But you are right, we might be able to collapse that in too. > Great! :-) Simplicity is a win for everyone. No, I'm still in favor of keeping both. The status whiteboard is in no way used to tag bugs. > The status whiteboard, keywords, flags and now our current tag > implementation are four attempts over the course of Bugzilla's life to > get "tagging" (in the broad sense) right. We need to accept that all > four attempts missed the mark in one way or another, and that the rest > of the world has figured it out. Merging keywords and flags could make sense. But the status whiteboard deserves another purpose, as said above, and private tags, even if the backend code is merged with keywords/flags, should still be visually displayed differently. More below. > Why would that be a problem in practice when it isn't that a problem on > Twitter or Flickr or the many other sites which use tags? You don't find everything you want as easily on these sites with tags. > I think it's a matter of user expectation. Do we set up the expectation > that the personal tags you add to a bug are themselves private > information, or just not-displayed-by-default information? Private information! Your comparison with flags is totally out of topic. We never mentioned that flags can only be seen and queried by those who can set them. For private tags, I would hate that someone can happily query for bugs I tagged as "stupid_ideas" or some other tags I use or could use. I don't like Big Brother. LpSolit From mkanat at bugzilla.org Wed Dec 9 19:41:38 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:41:38 -0800 Subject: If You Used To Work On Bugzilla And No Longer Do... In-Reply-To: <4B1FDD59.7050308@gmail.com> References: <4B1ED9EE.8070204@bugzilla.org> <4B1FDD59.7050308@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B1FFD72.4060509@bugzilla.org> On 12/09/2009 09:24 AM, Bill Barry wrote: > I am sure there are others on this list with the same situation. I > replied to the list instead of directly to ask if you want those of us > in this situation to check in as well. Yes, absolutely. :-) -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From mockodin at gmail.com Thu Dec 10 17:26:34 2009 From: mockodin at gmail.com (Michael Thomas) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:26:34 -0800 Subject: Oracle Error Handling of values larger than max value of int Message-ID: <6b9407350912100926v3dbe9adauff12be00c2b15620@mail.gmail.com> Quick question, during development of the mssql port I ran across an issue where mssql will throw a fatal error vs mysql silently altering data. 533646 [MS-SQL] numeric values greater than 2147483647 throw 'Numeric value out of range' I'm curious how oracle handles this issue? The test is to use quicksearch and enter 10 or more 9's and hit search. Error or just the not found message? Mockodin MSSQL Development Instance http://bugzilla.zplace.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lpsolit at gmail.com Thu Dec 10 17:58:36 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:58:36 +0100 Subject: Oracle Error Handling of values larger than max value of int In-Reply-To: <6b9407350912100926v3dbe9adauff12be00c2b15620@mail.gmail.com> References: <6b9407350912100926v3dbe9adauff12be00c2b15620@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B2136CC.3080205@gmail.com> Le 10. 12. 09 18:26, Michael Thomas a ?crit : > I'm curious how oracle handles this issue? > The test is to use quicksearch and enter 10 or more 9's and hit search. > Error or just the not found message? Test yourself: https://landfill.bugzilla.org/bugzilla-tip-oracle/ LpSolit From gerv at mozilla.org Sat Dec 12 23:31:05 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:31:05 -0800 Subject: The Real Benefits of Bug Tracking Message-ID: http://www.geekherocomic.com/comics/2009-03-26-the-real-benefits-of-bug-tracking.png Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From tm at sci.fi Sun Dec 13 11:51:56 2009 From: tm at sci.fi (Teemu Mannermaa) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:51:56 +0200 Subject: Raindrop, mailing lists and Majordomo In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B24D55C.2060804@sci.fi> On 20.11.2009 12:27, Gervase Markham wrote: > "Majordomo2 (used by the Bugzilla and OpenBSD projects, among others) is > not supported, because it doesn't send List-* headers (alhough .. > Is ours configured to do so? If not, can it be? Looks like it's not. It can be since LpSolit did fix the "QA Team" mailing list to include at least List-ID and List-Post headers. Or is there more List-* headers that are needed? -- Teemu Mannermaa System Specialist "Anything is possible but probabilities vary." From mkanat at bugzilla.org Mon Dec 14 23:22:08 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:22:08 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? Message-ID: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> So, right now we wrap comments server-side at exactly 80 characters before displaying them in the web interface (except for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean, which are always wrapped client-side). Does it actually matter that comments are wrapped at 80 characters? We do it because that's the exact width of the textarea, and so the comments will come out looking almost exactly like they do in the textarea. Does that actually matter? I'm asking because there is currently a bug that would be resolved if we did all comment-wrapping client side. (Though I'm actually not sure that all browsers can do that reliably, but I haven't tested in a while so I forget.) The only problem is that, as far as I'm aware, there's no way in CSS to say "this element should be exactly X characters wide" so we'd lose the "wrap at exactly 80 characters" functionality. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From lpsolit at gmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:27:52 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:27:52 +0100 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> References: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B26C9F8.2090809@gmail.com> Le 15. 12. 09 00:22, Max Kanat-Alexander a ?crit : > Does it actually matter that comments are wrapped at 80 characters? We > do it because that's the exact width of the textarea Well, if that's the only argument, we can drop this hard limitation, because the width of the text in a textarea is not 80 if you write too much and the scrollbar appears. LpSolit From mkanat at bugzilla.org Mon Dec 14 23:34:25 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:34:25 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B26C9F8.2090809@gmail.com> References: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> <4B26C9F8.2090809@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B26CB81.60002@bugzilla.org> On 12/14/2009 03:27 PM, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote: > the width of the text in a textarea is not 80 if you write too > much and the scrollbar appears. That's actually an ancient bug in Gecko, as I recall. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From lpsolit at gmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:38:15 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:38:15 +0100 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B26CB81.60002@bugzilla.org> References: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> <4B26C9F8.2090809@gmail.com> <4B26CB81.60002@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B26CC67.6010401@gmail.com> Le 15. 12. 09 00:34, Max Kanat-Alexander a ?crit : > That's actually an ancient bug in Gecko, as I recall. Well, right, I should have said it the other way: with the scrollbar being displayed, the width is 80, else it's 82. Doesn't change my conclusion. LpSolit From mockodin at gmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:40:39 2009 From: mockodin at gmail.com (Michael Thomas) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:40:39 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B26CC67.6010401@gmail.com> References: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> <4B26C9F8.2090809@gmail.com> <4B26CB81.60002@bugzilla.org> <4B26CC67.6010401@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6b9407350912141540i2e9cdf13o63b8ae4b55bb3bd8@mail.gmail.com> Scrolls bars are ugly. But.. that's not to say it is not nice to be unrestricted at times. 2009/12/14 Fr?d?ric Buclin > Le 15. 12. 09 00:34, Max Kanat-Alexander a ?crit : > > That's actually an ancient bug in Gecko, as I recall. > > Well, right, I should have said it the other way: with the scrollbar > being displayed, the width is 80, else it's 82. Doesn't change my > conclusion. > > LpSolit > - > To view or change your list settings, click here: > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From altlist at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 05:08:54 2009 From: altlist at gmail.com (Albert Ting) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:08:54 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> References: <4B26C8A0.80109@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <3e89616e0912142108y1643b030ua6ca4c180bed8acb@mail.gmail.com> I prefer to get rid of server-side comment wrapping. In my case, people often submit patches text, with valid > 80 columns, and the auto-wrapping screws it up. Yes, they could have used attachments, yet it's more straightforward to add a comment for a small amount of text. On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 3:22 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote: > Does that actually matter? I'm asking because there is currently > a bug > that would be resolved if we did all comment-wrapping client side. > (Though I'm actually not sure that all browsers can do that reliably, > but I haven't tested in a while so I forget.) The only problem is that, > as far as I'm aware, there's no way in CSS to say "this element should > be exactly X characters wide" so we'd lose the "wrap at exactly 80 > characters" functionality. > > -Max > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerv at mozilla.org Wed Dec 16 19:11:54 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:11:54 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B2930FA.3080601@mozilla.org> On 14/12/09 15:22, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote: > Does it actually matter that comments are wrapped at 80 characters? We > do it because that's the exact width of the textarea, and so the > comments will come out looking almost exactly like they do in the textarea. > > Does that actually matter? I think it does. People often use both the expected width and the fixed-width font to do ASCII-art diagrams. > I'm asking because there is currently a bug > that would be resolved if we did all comment-wrapping client side. You mean using HTML features to get the browser to do the wrapping? My understanding is that there is a long history to why we got to where we are today with the way comments are wrapped. (I thought you'd been around for some of it?) Before making any changes, you'd need to read the old bugs. Myk Melez would also be a good person to ask - I seem to remember him being involved in the work. > (Though I'm actually not sure that all browsers can do that reliably, > but I haven't tested in a while so I forget.) The only problem is that, > as far as I'm aware, there's no way in CSS to say "this element should > be exactly X characters wide" so we'd lose the "wrap at exactly 80 > characters" functionality. That is indeed true. Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From gerv at mozilla.org Wed Dec 16 19:12:03 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:12:03 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 14/12/09 15:22, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote: > Does it actually matter that comments are wrapped at 80 characters? We > do it because that's the exact width of the textarea, and so the > comments will come out looking almost exactly like they do in the textarea. > > Does that actually matter? I think it does. People often use both the expected width and the fixed-width font to do ASCII-art diagrams. > I'm asking because there is currently a bug > that would be resolved if we did all comment-wrapping client side. You mean using HTML features to get the browser to do the wrapping? My understanding is that there is a long history to why we got to where we are today with the way comments are wrapped. (I thought you'd been around for some of it?) Before making any changes, you'd need to read the old bugs. Myk Melez would also be a good person to ask - I seem to remember him being involved in the work. > (Though I'm actually not sure that all browsers can do that reliably, > but I haven't tested in a while so I forget.) The only problem is that, > as far as I'm aware, there's no way in CSS to say "this element should > be exactly X characters wide" so we'd lose the "wrap at exactly 80 > characters" functionality. That is indeed true. Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From lpsolit at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 19:24:15 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:24:15 +0100 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B2930FA.3080601@mozilla.org> References: <4B2930FA.3080601@mozilla.org> Message-ID: <4B2933DF.1020600@gmail.com> Le 16. 12. 09 20:11, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > I think it does. People often use both the expected width and the > fixed-width font to do ASCII-art diagrams. I explained why this is irrelevant. When you do ASCII-art diagrams, you insert newlines yourself; you never expect the server (or browser) to do it for you. LpSolit From altlist at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 21:08:21 2009 From: altlist at gmail.com (Albert Ting) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:08:21 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B2933DF.1020600@gmail.com> References: <4B2930FA.3080601@mozilla.org> <4B2933DF.1020600@gmail.com> Message-ID: <3e89616e0912161308x757ed735tc6218dfc480dbf5@mail.gmail.com> I agree, which is why I don't want the server to add any newlines. In other words, I have cases where I have text longer than 80 lines, and I want it to stay as one line. 2009/12/16 Fr?d?ric Buclin > Le 16. 12. 09 20:11, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > > I think it does. People often use both the expected width and the > > fixed-width font to do ASCII-art diagrams. > > I explained why this is irrelevant. When you do ASCII-art diagrams, you > insert newlines yourself; you never expect the server (or browser) to do > it for you. > > LpSolit > - > To view or change your list settings, click here: > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerv at mozilla.org Thu Dec 17 00:25:53 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:25:53 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 16/12/09 11:12, Gervase Markham wrote: > My understanding is that there is a long history to why we got to where > we are today with the way comments are wrapped. (I thought you'd been > around for some of it?) Before making any changes, you'd need to read > the old bugs. Myk Melez would also be a good person to ask - I seem to > remember him being involved in the work. Here is the bug containing most of the discussion last time: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11901 Usability research suggests that wrapped text gets harder to read above a certain width (a few inches). This is why we've maintained the current display width. Particularly with screens getting larger and larger, allowing comments to span the full width of the window is a really bad idea. (I don't think that's what you are proposing, but I thought I'd say it.) Max: can you point us at the bug you are hoping to fix? Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From lpsolit at gmail.com Thu Dec 17 12:16:08 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:16:08 +0100 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B2A2108.3020508@gmail.com> Le 17. 12. 09 01:25, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > Max: can you point us at the bug you are hoping to fix? bug 425606 and bug 514703 LpSolit From xerces9 at gmail.com Thu Dec 17 14:09:18 2009 From: xerces9 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?David_Bala=C5=BEic?=) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:09:18 +0100 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9948385e0912170609x27cbb30er2dd5f03a0a325267@mail.gmail.com> 2009/12/17 Gervase Markham : > On 16/12/09 11:12, Gervase Markham wrote: >> >> My understanding is that there is a long history to why we got to where >> we are today with the way comments are wrapped. (I thought you'd been >> around for some of it?) Before making any changes, you'd need to read >> the old bugs. Myk Melez would also be a good person to ask - I seem to >> remember him being involved in the work. > > Here is the bug containing most of the discussion last time: > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11901 > > Usability research suggests that wrapped text gets harder to read above a > certain width (a few inches). This is why we've maintained the current > display width. Particularly with screens getting larger and larger, allowing > comments to span the full width of the window is a really bad idea. (I don't > think that's what you are proposing, but I thought I'd say it.) As a user (web surfer) I have this comment on this: I absolutely hate when the web server forces a decision like this on me. If the line is too long for me, I simply drag the edge of the browser window narrower and the problem is fixed in split second. With your way it either takes months or an eternity do one single change. I prefer the split second solution. Or at least give the user a choice. Thanks. Regards, David _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From after.fallout at gmail.com Thu Dec 17 14:38:28 2009 From: after.fallout at gmail.com (Bill Barry) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:38:28 -0700 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B2A2108.3020508@gmail.com> References: <4B2A2108.3020508@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B2A4264.1050008@gmail.com> Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote: > Le 17. 12. 09 01:25, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > >> Max: can you point us at the bug you are hoping to fix? >> > > bug 425606 and bug 514703 I hate both of those bugs (the first one much more, was going to file it but I never got the time to attempt to reproduce). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerv at mozilla.org Thu Dec 17 18:37:32 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:37:32 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3JednZhdC5vx57fWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@mozilla.org> On 17/12/09 06:09, David Bala?ic wrote: > I absolutely hate when the web server forces a decision like this on me. > If the line is too long for me, I simply drag the edge of the browser window > narrower and the problem is fixed in split second. Except that if the window is narrow enough for the optimum reading with for comments, it's too narrow to fit in all the bug fields above. A scheme where the recommended Bugzilla policy for window size was "you need to resize the window every time you scroll up and down a bug" would be laughable. And many people will not resize their window, and so get a sub-optimal reading experience without knowing why. An important usability tenet is to make life better for the user without bothering them about it or making them do stuff to get the benefit. Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From after.fallout at gmail.com Thu Dec 17 18:58:59 2009 From: after.fallout at gmail.com (Bill Barry) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:58:59 -0700 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <3JednZhdC5vx57fWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@mozilla.org> References: <3JednZhdC5vx57fWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@mozilla.org> Message-ID: <4B2A7F73.4040401@gmail.com> It'd be nice if the stuff wasn't doing server newlines but rather there was some kind of ruler at the top of the comment (either each comment individually or all together). The ruler could default at 100ish chars but you could click/drag it as wide or narrow as you need. This way for paragraph style comments it still looks nice, but for fancy stuff like ascii art it could be moved in/out to get the pic right. Also for quoted lines (ones that start with >), no re-lining should be done at all (either server side or client side with some fancy ruler thingy). Gervase Markham wrote: > On 17/12/09 06:09, David Bala?ic wrote: >> I absolutely hate when the web server forces a decision like this on me. >> If the line is too long for me, I simply drag the edge of the browser >> window >> narrower and the problem is fixed in split second. > > Except that if the window is narrow enough for the optimum reading > with for comments, it's too narrow to fit in all the bug fields above. > A scheme where the recommended Bugzilla policy for window size was > "you need to resize the window every time you scroll up and down a > bug" would be laughable. > > And many people will not resize their window, and so get a sub-optimal > reading experience without knowing why. An important usability tenet > is to make life better for the user without bothering them about it or > making them do stuff to get the benefit. > > Gerv > _______________________________________________ > dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list > dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From mkanat at bugzilla.org Thu Dec 17 21:11:52 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:11:52 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <3JednZhdC5vx57fWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@mozilla.org> References: <3JednZhdC5vx57fWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@mozilla.org> Message-ID: <4B2A9E98.2060301@bugzilla.org> On 12/17/2009 10:37 AM, Gervase Markham wrote: > Except that if the window is narrow enough for the optimum reading with > for comments, it's too narrow to fit in all the bug fields above. A > scheme where the recommended Bugzilla policy for window size was "you > need to resize the window every time you scroll up and down a bug" would > be laughable. Yeah, comments will never be the whole length of the window. The question is just whether or not we should be doing the wrapping with CSS instead of server-side. It would also make comments look different in email than they do on the web, as I'm pretty sure it's still considered rude to send unwrapped plain-text email. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From danieldickison at gmail.com Thu Dec 17 21:30:15 2009 From: danieldickison at gmail.com (Daniel Dickison) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:30:15 -0500 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: <4B2A9E98.2060301@bugzilla.org> References: <3JednZhdC5vx57fWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@mozilla.org> <4B2A9E98.2060301@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: On Dec 17, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote: > > Yeah, comments will never be the whole length of the window. > > The question is just whether or not we should be doing the wrapping > with CSS instead of server-side. > > It would also make comments look different in email than they do on the > web, as I'm pretty sure it's still considered rude to send unwrapped > plain-text email. I just wanted to point out that the comment input text field has never wrapped at 80-characters for me on Mac OS X, using both Safari and Chrome. Also, the font is not monospaced in the text field (even though it is in the existing comments). Perhaps it's a Webkit thing? Daniel P.S. I'm a lurker without having actually done any Bugzilla development, but I wanted to put this out there since nobody has mentioned it yet... From mkanat at bugzilla.org Thu Dec 17 21:41:23 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:41:23 -0800 Subject: 80-character comments: does it matter? In-Reply-To: References: <3JednZhdC5vx57fWnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@mozilla.org> <4B2A9E98.2060301@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B2AA583.70203@bugzilla.org> On 12/17/2009 01:30 PM, Daniel Dickison wrote: > I just wanted to point out that the comment input text field has never wrapped at 80-characters for me on Mac OS X, using both Safari and Chrome. Also, the font is not monospaced in the text field (even though it is in the existing comments). Perhaps it's a Webkit thing? It's not a WebKit thing, since it's monospace and 80 characters wide for me in Chrome. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From g_khatwani at yahoo.co.in Fri Dec 18 14:48:12 2009 From: g_khatwani at yahoo.co.in (gaurav khatwani) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:18:12 +0530 (IST) Subject: regarding first good bug Message-ID: <764122.64616.qm@web7903.mail.in.yahoo.com> hello, i am using ubuntu OS. i have run the two commands in the terminal given on this link: https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Simple_Firefox_build?? for ubuntu ? Please help me to know how to fix? "first good bug". ? regards gaurav k The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Yahoo! Homepage. http://in.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From gerv at mozilla.org Sat Dec 19 01:24:17 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:24:17 -0800 Subject: regarding first good bug In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 18/12/09 06:48, gaurav khatwani wrote: > hello, > i am using ubuntu OS. i have run the two commands in the terminal given on this link: > https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Simple_Firefox_build for ubuntu > > Please help me to know how to fix "first good bug". Hi :-) You've come into the wrong group, but that's OK. The best place to ask is on irc.mozilla.org, channel #education. Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From gerv at mozilla.org Mon Dec 21 14:43:48 2009 From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 14:43:48 +0000 Subject: Representing Bugzilla on FOSDEM and other events In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B2F89A4.70700@mozilla.org> On 09/12/09 08:07, Gabor Szabo wrote: > Specifically FOSDEM is less than 2 months away and the Perl community > has a stand there. > I'd like to understand if there are going to be Bugzilla developers or heavy > users who would like to promote Bugzilla on that stand or otherwise. I will be there, but I'll be doing Mozilla stuff. Frederic: are you planning to come to FOSDEM? :-) Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla From lpsolit at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:51:21 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:51:21 +0100 Subject: Representing Bugzilla on FOSDEM and other events In-Reply-To: <4B2F89A4.70700@mozilla.org> References: <4B2F89A4.70700@mozilla.org> Message-ID: <4B2FC3A9.7040608@gmail.com> Le 21. 12. 09 15:43, Gervase Markham a ?crit : > I will be there, but I'll be doing Mozilla stuff. Frederic: are you > planning to come to FOSDEM? :-) I don't plan to, no. LpSolit From mkanat at bugzilla.org Wed Dec 30 01:20:33 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:20:33 -0800 Subject: Ice Cream (Hard Freeze) Message-ID: <4B3AAAE1.9020104@bugzilla.org> Hey folks. So, as of last week or so, we're hard frozen for 3.6. That means that we're going to branch for 3.6, and trunk will become 3.8. I'd like to take this opportunity to do the bzr switchover, though, so we will approve patches for trunk but not check them in until we've switched to bzr. I'm currently waiting on Mozilla to finish setting up the bzr server, at which time I'll send out more information about switching over. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too. From lpsolit at gmail.com Wed Dec 30 02:23:52 2009 From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:23:52 +0100 Subject: Ice Cream (Hard Freeze) In-Reply-To: <4B3AAAE1.9020104@bugzilla.org> References: <4B3AAAE1.9020104@bugzilla.org> Message-ID: <4B3AB9B8.5000102@gmail.com> Le 30. 12. 09 02:20, Max Kanat-Alexander a ?crit : > we will approve patches for trunk but not check them in until we've > switched to bzr. Why couldn't we still commit to CVS till bzr is ready? Is there any technical problem to switch later? LpSolit From mkanat at bugzilla.org Thu Dec 31 10:32:06 2009 From: mkanat at bugzilla.org (Max Kanat-Alexander) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 02:32:06 -0800 Subject: Ice Cream (Hard Freeze) In-Reply-To: <4B3AB9B8.5000102@gmail.com> References: <4B3AAAE1.9020104@bugzilla.org> <4B3AB9B8.5000102@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B3C7DA6.1050904@bugzilla.org> On 12/29/2009 06:23 PM, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote: > Why couldn't we still commit to CVS till bzr is ready? Is there any > technical problem to switch later? Mostly that it's easiest to switch over during a branch time like this, so that there's no confusion later on in explaining when we switched, or any other confusions caused by switching mid-stream during a development branch. I'm hoping that the bzr server will be ready quickly enough that none of this will be a problem, though. -Max -- http://www.everythingsolved.com/ Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.