hide port, server type and server name in "Server Settings" panel for imap servers based on redirector type

RESOLVED WONTFIX

Status

SeaMonkey
MailNews: Account Configuration
--
minor
RESOLVED WONTFIX
16 years ago
11 years ago

People

(Reporter: (not reading, please use seth@sspitzer.org instead), Unassigned)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

hide port, server type and server name in "Server Settings" panel for imap 
servers based on redirector type.

for certain redirector types, we want to hide this from the user.

we should choose to hide this based on a pref, like we did with 

"mail.accountmanager. " + redirector type + ".hide_advanced_button"

Comment 1

16 years ago
Accepting bug.
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED

Comment 2

16 years ago
You mean like web based accounts? If so, why not just leave it as is, static 
text instead of editable text. It keeps the layout of the pane consistent with 
other accounts.

Comment 3

16 years ago
the problem is that it confuses a lot of people and they end up typing that
server in when creating an account.  And when they do, it won't work.  I'd be
fine if it had a pretty name, but I don't think it should have a server name.
taking all of varada's bugs.
Assignee: varada → sspitzer
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Product: Browser → Seamonkey

Updated

13 years ago
Assignee: sspitzer → mail

Comment 5

12 years ago
(In reply to comment #0)
> hide port, server type and server name in "Server Settings" panel for imap 
> servers based on redirector type.
> 
> for certain redirector types, we want to hide this from the user.

see also bug 208175, bug 94140

 
> we should choose to hide this based on a pref, like we did with 
> "mail.accountmanager. " + redirector type + ".hide_advanced_button"

example use?
Severity: normal → minor
OS: Windows 2000 → All
Hardware: PC → All

Comment 6

11 years ago
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > hide port, server type and server name in "Server Settings" panel for imap 
> > servers based on redirector type.
> > 
> > for certain redirector types, we want to hide this from the user.
> 
> see also bug 208175, bug 94140

are all these bugs basically the same issue?
QA Contact: nbaca

Comment 7

11 years ago
The redirector type stuff is not used anymore. It was used to talk to AOL (and AOL properties like Compuserve and Netscape)'s IMAP server - it should be stripped out of the code, though there's always the fear that the second we do that something will come up that will make it useful again :-)

Comment 8

11 years ago
->WONTFIX then, no point of doing any more work for something that should be removed.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX

Comment 9

11 years ago
(In reply to comment #8)
> ->WONTFIX then, no point of doing any more work for something that should be
> removed.

true. what disposition then for bug 208175, bug 94140?  And should new bug be filed to rip out redirector?

Comment 10

11 years ago
Bug 94140 would become moot if we strip it out of the redirector type code (whatever the issue there is). David: do we dare? :)

Comment 11

11 years ago
Sure, let's rip it out...
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.