Closed Bug 63096 Opened 24 years ago Closed 20 years ago

Add "P3P" component

Categories

(bugzilla.mozilla.org :: Administration, task)

Product:
bugzilla.mozilla.org
Component:
Administration
Type:
task
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: bugs4hj, Assigned: asa)

References

Details

I belief that Bugzilla needs an new Component, for P3P

The Platform for Privacy Preferences 1.0 (P3P1.0) Specification may be visit by
using this uri: http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-P3P-20001215/

It's a W3C Candidate Recommendation starting from December 15.
Microsoft is working hard on this issue, Netscape/Mozilla should do this also.
Protecting the users privacy is getting more and more attention, this will be
very important, for a lot of us.

If you like to see this option in Mozilla, simply vote for this one!
Thank you, HJ.
DUP of bug 62399. See also bug 62453. Both of these bugs are easy to find using
a search for open bugs that contain "P3P" in the subject line -- please do a 
search for bugs before filing new ones! Thanks.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 62399 ***
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 24 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
The reporter already commented in bug 62399 on Dec. 8th, so the duplicate is
deliberate.

Verified dup.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
NO duplicate and NOT deliberate, but 'mid air collission' made a mess of it!
Sorry for you... but hey, your only human!
URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-P3P-2000...
Component: Browser-General → Bugzilla
Product: Browser → Webtools
Summary: Gore and Bush both vote for this one!
*blink* *blink*

Ok, now I'm lost...
This bug is for adding a P3P component to bugzilla, so it's not a dup of bug 
62399, which is for implementing P3P.  (HJ, it would have been helpful if you 
had provided a summary for this bug that made that clear.)
Status: VERIFIED → UNCONFIRMED
Resolution: DUPLICATE → ---
Summary: Add "P3P" component
Sending to new component for keyword/component changes to bugzilla.mozilla.org.
Component: Bugzilla → Bugzilla: Keyword/Component Changes
Product: Webtools → mozilla.org
QA Contact: doronr → lchiang
Cc mstoltz and ian, since they know more about P3P than I do.  Would it be 
useful to have a bugzilla component for P3P?
OS: Windows NT → All
Hardware: PC → All
Do we have any P3P bugs?
Heck, do we have any P3P code to have bugs in?
When we have code, we will probably have bugs.  Until we have bugs there is no
need for a Component.  WontFix.  Please reopen when if/when we have sufficient
P3P code that tracking a group of bugs in that code becomes necessary.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 24 years ago → 24 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
verified won't fix.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
And what if someone is willing to implement P3P support for Mozilla?
H-J, if someone contributes code and bugs are filed against that code then I
will consider creating a component for those bugs.  I'm not about to start
creating components for every RFE filed.  Code first, then component :)
IBM has contributed P3P code. I'm working on integrating it. When it's checked
in, a Bugzilla component may be a good thing.
reopening.  cool.
Status: VERIFIED → UNCONFIRMED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
I filed this REF only after reading Thomas Lendacky's comment of 2000-12-11. And
as far as I know is Thomas working for IBM, right?

Confirming and adding "waiting for p3p code to be added to the browser" to the 
status whiteboard.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Whiteboard: waiting for p3p code to be added to the browser
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
the code is in 
/extensions/p3p/
default owner should probably be Tom Lendacky ( toml@us.ibm.com )
can someone volunteer to be the QA contact? -- note that we're unlikely to
create the component w/o additional bugs but it's still good to know whom to
give the bugs in the interim.
Whiteboard: waiting for p3p code to be added to the browser
QA Contact: lchiang → timeless
timeless: All P3P related bugs should be directed my way.
QA > junruh@netscape.com. Asa, please add the P3P component.
QA Contact: timeless → junruh
I toyed with the idea of having the qa for a new componnet be the qa of the bug
about it but decided that it was not worth it, please leave me as qa for my
component, thank you.

before anyone creates a component, we need to have a description, could someone
please suggest such an entity?
QA Contact: junruh → timeless
Before we have a component we need to have bugs. Are there a sufficiently large
set of bugs to warrant adding a new component to the already really long list?
Asa: There aren't many bugs on P3P as of today, however, that could change soon
once, P3P gets enabled, and people start using it.
*** Bug 136926 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Wontfix. There is now a Browser:P3P component in Bugscape.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 24 years ago → 22 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Verified.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
*** Bug 211411 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reopening, bugscape is not enough, as p3p is on in mozilla now.
And there are bugs on p3p, search in the component XML for p3p. That is not
obvious, as I said in bug 211411.
I'd favour a "Privacy: P3P" over a mere "P3P" for bugzilla, that is a bit more
self explanatory, as p3p is exposed in the privacy panel of page info, for
example.
Status: VERIFIED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
*** Bug 239609 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'm told we have only about 15 bugs on P3P, and are considering removing support
for this pointless technology altogether, so... \/\/hatever...
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 22 years ago → 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Component: Bugzilla: Keywords & Components → Administration
Product: mozilla.org → bugzilla.mozilla.org
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.