Closed Bug 444913 Opened 14 years ago Closed 6 months ago

Port |Bug 413781 – XBLify folder-selection menus| to SeaMonkey


(SeaMonkey :: MailNews: Message Display, defect)

Not set


(seamonkey2.1 wontfix)

Tracking Status
seamonkey2.1 --- wontfix


(Reporter: sgautherie, Unassigned)


(Blocks 1 open bug)


(Whiteboard: [patchlove][needs new assignee])


(1 file, 2 obsolete files)

Per bug 360488 dependency.


Bug 438647 already ported the backend/common part of it;
the frontend/separated part remains to be ported.

Remember to take into account all the (fixed) regressions too.
(Currently, there are still 2 open ones.)
Blocks: TB2SM
Attached patch Patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Depends on Bug 467249
Depends on: 467249
Attached patch Updated patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #350668 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Blocks: 68174
Assignee: mail → bugzilla
Blocks: 460953
QA Contact: message-display
Flags: wanted-seamonkey2?
Getting us to same same API as Thunderbird 3 is surely something we want.
Flags: wanted-seamonkey2? → wanted-seamonkey2+
Blocks: 507676
No longer blocks: TB2SM
Comment on attachment 362880 [details] [diff] [review]
Updated patch

(In reply to comment #1)
> Depends on Bug 467249

That bug is now fixed.


This patch doesn't apply anymore as the files have moved from /mailnews to /suite.

Frank, can you resume work on this bug?
Or shall I try and take over?
Attachment #362880 - Attachment is obsolete: true
I already have an updated version locally. The "problem" is just at the moment I don't see what this bug would be good for in the next SeaMonkey 2 release. So I planned to request review when we have more free reviewing resources.
(In reply to comment #5)

A short answer would be comment 3 "kairo: wanted‑seamonkey2+"...
Please, proceed :-)
Many bug are wanted, we just don't have the reviewing resources, I'm quite sure of that.
Fwiw, bug 507601 comment 1:
From  Robert Kaiser   2009-07-31 04:55:34 PDT

we probably should only take it for 2.0 if it has patch and reviews for the
last beta

I'd think you could ask and see what the reviewer does.
Anyway, I asked you and that's all I intended to do...
Maybe discuss this at tomorrow meeting?
Depends on: 439486
(In reply to comment #8)
> we probably should only take it for 2.0 if it has patch and reviews for the
> last beta

I think we can take a careful look at it in any case. I'd feel better if we'd have branched, have unit tests for this stuff, have them running on trunk and could bake an eventual patch there for at least a cycle, but we don't have any of that, so let's take a careful look when a patch is there and going through reviews.
I just discovered that bug 510793 "depends" on

Frank, could you port (at least) that (and whatever else goes with it)?
Blocks: 510793
Not wanted for 2.0 any more at this stage, let's push it to 2.1
Flags: wanted-seamonkey2.1+
Flags: wanted-seamonkey2.0-
Flags: wanted-seamonkey2.0+
Frank, any update status of yours?
Attached patch New patchSplinter Review
This one applies again, still need to check if I missed anything.
Flags: wanted-seamonkey2.1+
(In reply to comment #14)
> Created attachment 419822 [details] [diff] [review] [review]
> New patch
> This one applies again, still need to check if I missed anything.

Dropped off your radar?
Blocks: 657604
Blocks: 657607
No longer blocks: 657604
No longer blocks: 460953
Franck, do you intend to complete this bug? Or could you unassign yourself?
Won't finish this patch in the foreseeable future.
Assignee: bugzilla → nobody
this blocks several non-trivial bugs, so -> normal
Severity: trivial → normal
Whiteboard: [patchlove][needs new assignee]
Blocks: 507669
Depends on: 1001071
Closed: 6 months ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Duplicate of bug: 1677365
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.