This bug is causing a workflow problem in Supernova 115* and we are starting to see comments from users in the Support forum and other forums like reddit (link previously mentioned) https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1424967 I fnd it difficult to believe this omission of functionality was intentional, so I choose to prefer to think of this bug as an accidental omission oversight by the developers. But now it's known as a bug - a complete none inclusion of an important piece of functionality that effects workflow, to users the comments posted seem to suggest the developers have not grasped the extent this functionality is used. When a new major upgrade is released, users do not expect the product to offer less. Surely, the new Supernova is able to provide at least the same functionality of it's predecessor version 102*. Sorting out this bug would show to users that developers do listen to reasonable requests to maintain normal functionality in new upgrades.
Bug 1817605 Comment 17 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
This bug is causing a workflow problem in Supernova 115* and we are starting to see comments from users in the Support forum and other forums like reddit (link previously mentioned) https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1424967 https://forums.opensuse.org/t/need-features-missing-from-thunderbird-102-they-are-in-betterbird-102-a-thunderbird-fork-by-the-original-thunderbird-developer/166314 I fnd it difficult to believe this omission of functionality was intentional, so I choose to prefer to think of this bug as an accidental omission oversight by the developers. But now it's known as a bug - a complete none inclusion of an important piece of functionality that effects workflow, to users the comments posted seem to suggest the developers have not grasped the extent this functionality is used. When a new major upgrade is released, users do not expect the product to offer less. Surely, the new Supernova is able to provide at least the same functionality of it's predecessor version 102*. Sorting out this bug would show to users that developers do listen to reasonable requests to maintain normal functionality in new upgrades.