Open Bug 361248 Opened 19 years ago Updated 13 years ago

Synchronize mail/ <-> mailnews/ <msgMail3PaneWindow.js>

Categories

(SeaMonkey :: MailNews: Message Display, defect)

defect
Not set
minor

Tracking

(Not tracked)

ASSIGNED

People

(Reporter: sgautherie, Assigned: sgautherie)

References

Details

Attachments

(3 files, 6 obsolete files)

Attached patch (Av1-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> (obsolete) — Splinter Review
mail/ -> mailnews/ whitespace cleanup, and a few code/comment rewrites. (for future checkin)
Assignee: mail → sgautherie.bz
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Av1-SM, trimmed for review(s).
Attachment #245999 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #245999 - Flags: review?
Attachment #245999 - Flags: review? → review?(iann_bugzilla)
Comment on attachment 245999 [details] [diff] [review] (Av1_Bw-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> (for review only) >- if (event.originalTarget.localName == "treecol") >+ if (event.originalTarget.localName == "treecol") { I find this change hard to believe, I always thought that scott and david like to put their {s on their own line.
Attachment #245999 - Flags: superreview?(neil) → superreview+
Attachment #245999 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla) → review+
Av1-SM, with comment 3 suggestion(s). (for checkin) NB: I had copied the mail/ line, but I agree that it was not the main style of that file.
Attachment #245998 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment on attachment 246121 [details] [diff] [review] (Av1a-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: Comment 5] Checkin: { 2006-11-21 03:05 neil%parkwaycc.co.uk mozilla/mailnews/base/resources/content/msgMail3PaneWindow.js 1.297 } 'approval-seamonkey1.1=?': Trivial U.I. code cleanup, no risk.
Attachment #246121 - Attachment description: (Av1a-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> → (Av1a-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: Comment 5]
Attachment #246121 - Flags: approval-seamonkey1.1?
Attachment #246121 - Flags: approval-seamonkey1.1? → approval-seamonkey1.1+
Comment on attachment 246121 [details] [diff] [review] (Av1a-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: Comment 5] this 1) does not apply cleanly to branch 2) does not synchronize the mail/ and mailnews/ versions of the file (they're quite a bit different code-wise). 3) some of the capitalization changes actually move away from what the mail/ version has. I don't really know why (even without the above problems) we'd want this for the branch.
(In reply to comment #6) > (From update of attachment 246121 [details] [diff] [review] [edit]) > this > 1) does not apply cleanly to branch May be: I had not requested branch checkin for this (Trunk) patch. > 2) does not synchronize the mail/ and mailnews/ versions of the file (they're > quite a bit different code-wise). True: This should be a first cleanup only, before looking into the real code differences. > 3) some of the capitalization changes actually move away from what the mail/ > version has. Sure: I have not posted the TB patch yet, as I was waiting for another bug/patch checkin to its file. > I don't really know why (even without the above problems) we'd want this for > the branch. Well, I don't see why we would not ;-| (In short, while I often have to wait for someone to checkin my patches; this time, it seems you tried to apply something not (yet) made to be :-<)
> May be: I had not requested branch checkin for this (Trunk) patch. You requested approval. You shouldn't request branch approval for a patch that shouldn't land on that branch. > Well, I don't see why we would not ;-| We are near releasing 1.1 (there are still issues, so it's not something that will happen tomorrow). The branch is for low risk / high reward patches. The patch here has very little reward (although it is low risk).
Comment on attachment 246121 [details] [diff] [review] (Av1a-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: Comment 5] revoking approval, does not improve branch in any useful way (probably nice cleanup, but unneeded on a branch) - esp. as patch developer says "I had not requested branch checkin for this (Trunk) patch." Am I right that this has been fixed on trunk? If so, please mark the bug as FIXED as it should be.
Attachment #246121 - Flags: approval-seamonkey1.1+ → approval-seamonkey1.1-
(In reply to comment #9) > Am I right that this has been fixed on trunk? No, 1+ patches should follow.
Attached patch (Bv1-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> (obsolete) — Splinter Review
New mail/ -> mailnews/ whitespace sync, and 2 code rewrites: *line 675: add a semicolon at the end of the line. *line 882: split the line in two.
Attachment #285816 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #285816 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla)
Attached patch (Cv1-TB) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Minor mailnews/ -> mail/ sync, partly from Av1a-SM patch.
Attachment #285821 - Flags: superreview?(mscott)
Attachment #285821 - Flags: review?(mscott)
Attachment #285821 - Flags: superreview?(mscott)
Attachment #285821 - Flags: superreview+
Attachment #285821 - Flags: review?(mscott)
Attachment #285821 - Flags: review+
Comment on attachment 285816 [details] [diff] [review] (Bv1-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> > { > gDefaultSearchViewTerms = null; > viewDebug("searching gVirtualFolderTerms\n"); >- gDBView.viewFolder = gMsgFolderSelected; >- ViewChangeByFolder(gMsgFolderSelected); >+ gDBView.viewFolder = gMsgFolderSelected; >+ ViewChangeByFolder(gMsgFolderSelected); > } That's not exactly better, since the indent should be 2 spaces. On the lines you're touching anyway, please a) add a space after if, for etc. b) put return on its own line, e.g. >+ if(gThreadAndMessagePaneSplitter) return gThreadAndMessagePaneSplitter; if (gThreadAndMessagePaneSplitter) return gThreadAndMessagePaneSplitter;
Attachment #285816 - Flags: superreview?(neil) → superreview+
Attached patch (Bv2-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Bv1-SM, updated per comment 13, and a little more.
Attachment #285816 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #285882 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #285882 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla)
Attachment #285816 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla)
Attachment #285882 - Flags: superreview?(neil) → superreview+
Attachment #285882 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla) → review+
Bv2-SM, with 3 function optimizations (as I did in Av1-SM). (Sorry, that's a long time since I have worked on this :-<)
Attachment #285882 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #285937 - Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #285937 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla)
Comment on attachment 285937 [details] [diff] [review] (Bv3-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: comment 23] > } > function GetTotalCountElement() Sorry I didn't notice before, but this could do with a blank line too.
Attachment #285937 - Flags: superreview?(neil) → superreview+
Bv1-SM, sync'ed with Bv3-SM. (Sorry, that's a long time since I have worked on this :-<)
Attachment #285821 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #285942 - Flags: superreview?(mscott)
Attachment #285942 - Flags: review?(mscott)
(In reply to comment #16) > (From update of attachment 285937 [details] [diff] [review]) > > } > > function GetTotalCountElement() > Sorry I didn't notice before, but this could do with a blank line too. Agreed, yet let's settle for the current patch for now; I'll do this in a next (code sync') patch...
Attachment #285937 - Flags: review?(iann_bugzilla) → review+
Keywords: checkin-needed
Comment on attachment 285942 [details] [diff] [review] (Cv2-TB) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: comment 26] serge, is this change purely white space or is there a code change in here too? Thanks!
> is there a code change in here too? Scott, there are some minor comment changes, and 3 trivial function optimizations.
Attachment #286663 - Flags: superreview?(mscott)
Comment on attachment 286663 [details] [diff] [review] (Cv2-TB_Bw) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> (for review only) thanks
Attachment #286663 - Flags: superreview?(mscott) → superreview+
Comment on attachment 285942 [details] [diff] [review] (Cv2-TB) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: comment 26] (Still need a r+ on either of the patches)
Attachment #285942 - Flags: superreview?(mscott)
Whiteboard: [c-n: Bv3-SM]
Comment on attachment 285937 [details] [diff] [review] (Bv3-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: comment 23] {{ 2007-11-04 06:14 bugzilla%standard8.plus.com mozilla/mailnews/base/resources/content/msgMail3PaneWindow.js 1.316 }}
Attachment #285937 - Attachment description: (Bv3-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> → (Bv3-SM) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: comment 23]
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [c-n: Bv3-SM]
Target Milestone: --- → seamonkey2.0alpha
(In reply to comment #18) > (In reply to comment #16) > > (From update of attachment 285937 [details] [diff] [review] [details]) > > > } > > > function GetTotalCountElement() > > Sorry I didn't notice before, but this could do with a blank line too. > > I'll do this in a next (code sync') patch... Done, in bug 365049 attachment 287347 [details] [diff] [review].
Blocks: 365049
Serge, can we clear this review request? I reviewed the -uw version of the same patch didn't I?
Attachment #285942 - Flags: review?(mscott)
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [c-n: Cv2-TB, comment 25]
Cv2-TB: Checking in mail/base/content/msgMail3PaneWindow.js; /cvsroot/mozilla/mail/base/content/msgMail3PaneWindow.js,v <-- msgMail3PaneWindow.js new revision: 1.139; previous revision: 1.138 done Leaving open, as I'm not sure if this is done or not.
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [c-n: Cv2-TB, comment 25]
Attachment #285942 - Attachment description: (Cv2-TB) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> → (Cv2-TB) <msgMail3PaneWindow.js> [Checkin: comment 26]
No longer blocks: 365049
Depends on: 365049
This bug is open but targeted for seamonkey2.0a1, which has been released a long time ago. Please set the target milestone to an appropriate value, "---" if it has no specific target.
Attachment #245999 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #286663 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Target Milestone: seamonkey2.0a1 → ---
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: