This is a tracking bug only. It serves to collect the kind of bugs that just look dumb and make Mozilla advocacy harder. Mark those bug dependant on this one.
Adding some highly visible bugs as dependencies.
Added a few bugs to the dependency list, related to my comments in the above mozillazine talkback i.e. not only "dumb-looking" bugs, but those that are too simple not to be fixed at this stage. I don't think anyone would argue with the ones I've added, but feel free to remove those that are more involved than they might appear. Btw, I'm sympathetic with the old "I should be fixing these bugs myself" mantra, but it'll be a few months before I'm in a position to even attempt that, unfortunately.
oliver's bug, not chofmann's.
I think that fixing bug 55454, "Make (new) Modern the mozilla default skin", would help Mozilla advocacy. I've only gotten several friends to download Mozilla, but twice so far the following conversation has occurred: (J mentions that he spends a lot of his time working on Mozilla and convinces H to download it and try it out.) H: Hmm, it looks like Netscape 4. J: Try View > Apply Theme > Modern. H: Wow. Pretty. H: I'm keeping this.
The summary for this bug is bound to offend somebody. Putting a bug on a list of "dumb-looking bugs" is like telling the person workingon the bug "you're too stupid to fix this trivial problem". I understand there has already been some static over this (macpeep's Mozine post, couldn't find the actual bug it happened in)--not that invalidating a bug because it has been marked as blocking this is the right thing to do, but it shouldn't be a big surprise that it happened. The owner might want to consider changing the summary to be less insulting to developers, and hence more effective for lobbying. Just my 2 cents.
I agree. The bug I added doesn't look trivial ("dumb")... I added it because lots of *nix people expect this kind of feature in their mail client and, hence, it makes mozilla advocacy harder.
Reporter, is this actually tracking bug for: trivial bugs that make Mozilla advocacy harder or: bugs that make Mozilla advocacy harder or: important bugs that make Mozilla advocacy harder ? When you have decided please change the summary and remove/add bugs as necessary. Thanks!
Ok, I removed the "dumb-looking" part.
Really removing it this time.
The present summary makes bugs like the lack of PGP support (bug 56052) fit here perfectly. What do you think? (I refrain from adding it to the list)
Although bug 88297 (alt text tooltips for images) is marked as wontfix, I and probably many others would like to see this bug fixed. I know it's not standards compliant to use alt text as tooltips, but if you use the TITLE tag as recommended, tooltips will not show up in NS4x. You can work around this issue by writing both ALT and TITLE text, but how many people are actually going to take the time to retrofit all of their pages with the TITLE tag? Moreover, major web publishing packages such as Dreamweaver doesn't even use the TITLE tag except in hotspots of image maps. If it's decided not to implement this feature in mozilla, fine, but at least put it the Netscape browser.
I'd like to add a few more dependencies that make it difficult to recommend wider use of Mozilla: Bug 82973 Sun compose key isn't recognised Bug 87754 When using "Save As" Mozilla does not get correct filename from URL Bug 36557 LDAP Support Bug 62586 Need Titletips (or tooltips) for Cropped Text in Message Header Pane Bug 91662 emails with long subjects make it impossible to see the attachment tree and make thread pane go wild, if message pane is visible and you are not in "collapsed" header view.
Added: bug 11632: [RFE] Save Page With Images, Stylesheets, Objects, Applets bug 43923: Support for APOP bug 58744: 3rd party download managers not supported bug 72279: NEW - Need visual indicators for Watched, Killed threads bug 73712: Need Win32 and Linux/GTK icon files for each window Most of them were deleted by firstname.lastname@example.org before I had time to create a comment. I hope that was only a mid-air colission.
I was tempted to add bug 94870 as a dependency, however I take it that we want to keep regression bugs off the list? Otherwise, the number of dependencies on this bug could grow too large with each daily build. Considering that we're tracking those bugs that make advocacy harder, perhaps we should also restrict the dependency list to only those bugs that appear in the milestone builds?
I think that regressions should go into this bug, too. Same for bugs that are not in a milestone (yet): If they are not fixed, they will be in the next milestone(s). But you are right, we should keep this list from growing too big. Anyway, I will remove bugs when they are resolved.
Adding bug 65111 about being able to delete a whole thread in mail/news (as opposed to deleting each message in the thread individually).
Removing bug 65111 because you can expand a thread and highlight the whole thread to delete it... duh :-\
Another bug that should be considered it is bug 30057. Many people that use Outlook with multiple accounts will find harder to use Mozilla if they have to be moving between a lot of folders just to read all their mail.
Attempting to add Bug 62026 (Inline images in news posts not rendered progressively). Very difficult to read messages attached to images without it (Especially on a modem line!). Also very difficult to use newsgroups in the alt.binaries.pictures heirarchy. (It waits until the entire image is downloaded before showing anything).
Adding a few more dependencies, related to HTML validation problems of pages called by the browser e.g. about: services, help pages, etc. Before anyone complains that I'm just adding my own bugs to the list (which I am!), I think these are directly related to this bug's summary. Its difficult to champion mozilla as a standards compliant browser when its own pages fail w3.org validation. As soon as I get an opportunity, I'll try and wrap these ones up myself - they are fairly trivial but, I think, important none the less.
Added dependency on bug 74157, lack of support for encrypted / signed (S/MIME) mail.
Oliver: might I suggest leaving bugs that are resolved/verified on this list? 1. It serves as a reference to see how many of these important bugs were actually resolved. 2. If they ever are re-opened, it will be noted here too. This is an issue because unless a bug is marked "CLOSED" it can always be re-opened. Bugs have no guarantee of staying fixed. 3. It saves the people on resolved bugs one more spam email (which isn't a real reason since spam is life on Bugzilla, but thought i'd toss it in anyway).
Actually, I believe even a bug that's CLOSED can be REOPENED.
Christopher: OK, I'll leave those bugs here. Duplicates should be an exception, though (when they are verified).
Adding bug 79240 - Same tooltips for back/forward/print buttons and drop-downs (not too urgent as IE gets this wrong too).
I'd like to add a some web developers issues: bug 55583 - view-source should show original source (use cached source) bug 11520 - [RFE] Ability to view stylesheet source bug 24478 - View image should put Width x Height in the title of window bug 82059 - Page Info design tracking bug (missing items) [all Page Info issues are important for developers] User issues: bug 10491 - Show link as :visited if opened in another window bug 41924 - Change how layout handles broken images (alt text) bug 22687 - [RFE] PGP Plugin bug 22056 - Show toolbars as text/icons/both bug 68136 - Mozilla should have a Full-screen mode
Adam Hauner: This bug is not for tracking cool features that will make Mozilla look better (advocacy easier). It is for tracking "embarassing" bugs that makes Mozilla look bad (advocacy harder). Bug 55086 was a prime example of that. 55583 is probably the only bug on your list that can be considered a bug that makes advocacy harder IMO...
On the basis of earlier comments #34 and #35, shouldn't bug 55583 be added to the dependency list? (I think it should.)
I'm not sure, if bug 36810 is right one - futured non-assigned enhancement with keyword halpwanted...
It's what I meant to add... IMHO, it should be assigned and being worked on since this "enhancement" is probably costing Mozilla many users who will choose some other browser that includes this feature (read galeon). I used galeon for a while recently and, personally, I was very glad to be able to get back all my tabs after galeon crashed or I shut it down for whatever reason. However, if the bug in question is deemed not to belong here, feel free to remove it :-)
This tracking bug is about bugs that make Mozilla look bad, i.e. bugs that would make users turn away if we try to get them to use Mozilla. This bug is not about features that would just make Mozilla cool. Removing the dependency on bug 36810.
bug 56301 - spellchecker. I know several people that keep using Netscape 4 and refuse to switch to Mozilla until it has the spellchecker.
Bug 64476 - threads with unread returns false positives: still can't believe that this bug hasn't been fixed yet.
I'd like to nominate Bug 105263. DND HTML bookmarks was the only feature that kept me using NS4.x for so long.
Adding bug 116273 (Mozilla can't render the news.bbc.co.uk site correctly). Its too embarassing to recommend Mozilla to anyone in the UK whilst this bug is outstanding. (See also bug 125056).
Since bug 83289 is listed in "depends", I would like to very similar problems with bad font renderring: there are missing 1 pixel horizontal lines in text (fonts) while scrolling. This doesn't happen on every page, but cca on 1/10 of them. See bug 131107, bug 129400, bug 80530 (and cca 10 others, see comments) ... and finally bug 63336 (could be the source of this problem). I uploaded some screenshots of the problem at http://Xtrmntr.org/ORBman/tmp/hlp/
adding self to cc list
I would _very_ strongly recommend adding bug #62460. Not sure if I should do this myself. Someone else?
I would _very_ strongly recommend adding bug #62460. Not sure if I should do this myself. Someone else?
Any DHTML perf bugs ? :)
Markus: I think bug 129115 is one of the Big Win bugs for DHTML perf. But, of course, you already knew that, since you're CC'd on that bug as well :).
Adding some bugs which heavily impact Mozilla's image as a browser capable of DHTML.
Is bug 7251 still an embarrassment? I think it's pretty reasonable nowadays (even on my relatively low-spec machine), even without that pre-loading feature ('quicklaunch' or something, I forget the name).
I'll leave bug 7251 in for a while as still this one of the main complaints by some of my friends about Mozilla on Linux.
Are we supposed to be removing FIXED bugs from the blockers list? Currently, 30 of 87 are closed.
No, "fixed" bugs can sometimes be reopened. And it makes it easier to gauge progress.
I'd like to nominate bug 117371, see http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117371#c7: The top text: "Enable features that help interpret web pages" is incredibly inaccurate. It has nothing to do with the cache, proxies, HTTP networking, the Mouse Wheel, anonymous FTP, or much of the other advanced options
adding bug 33732 re mousewheels on Windows. With many older mouse drivers, the mouse-wheel will only scroll the 1st list -- no matter where else you click. The workaround, for Logitech mice, is to enable the "Office97-compatible" option, but this is not mentioned in the Release Notes.
does anyone the number of the TechEvang/bank-Tracking bug? It should also be added... is there a tracking bug for startup performance?
Yes there is. It blocks the 1.0 performance tracking bug, which blocks the 1.0 tracking bug.
ok, there they are: bug 124594 is the bank TechEvang tracking bug bug 7251 is the startup performance (which is already in this looong list)
I nominate bug 104532, status bar not updating on tab switch.
nominating bug 148364 and bug 124699 - with supporting useless propietary HTML, you can't expect people to understand, why we don't support document.all or <layer>
I would like to add: Bug 122927 New windows are not opened in java applets if "open unrequested windows" preference is not selected This bug refutes any useful claim that Mozilla can "block popup ads", which it does, but at the expense of a fairly major productivity hit.
I guess 129992 was a Typo - that's Trash, but not a valid bug
Nominating bug 109607: Tabs are almost useless in Classic because you can't identify the active one. Look at this screenshot: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=78182&action=view
guanxi, I have seen the same problem before, but on most systems it doesn't look like that (i.e. it looks normal). It came as a result of some 3rd-party app I'd installed. I think it was the tabbrowser extensions. The same thing may be the case with you.
Nominating bug 32218. I replace the default splash screen with a modified Slater5 everywhere I install it because it's caused some bad first impressions.
I'm sticking with my nomination of bug 109607 in comment #66 despite Shark Daddy's comment #67. Many have confirmed it (see bug 109607) and only Shark has said otherwise. Please do NOT discuss further here; post to bug 109607 where it belongs. Any contributions to the bug, including anything that might support Shark's observation, would be appreciated.
Nominating bug 159424 because it breaks many working applications. I would also like to nominate bug 139258 because without crypto.signText() mozilla is not usable for some real web applications. Actually I added them to the dependency list.
I wouldn't use Gecko for important stuff should bug 122063 occur on an important site. (see last url)
cc to myself.
Bug 137901 ("Context menus: Swap page and frame related options")is also a good candidate for this list! It is more and more becoming a "political" thing... :-(
Bug 16409: Spellchecker for the browser window (form fields) - similar to www.iespell.com The lack of a browser spellchecker is exactly why I'm posting this from (god forbid) IE6. I know that I can copy the text to external application or to www.spellcheck.net, but once you start using a built-in spellchecker... you're hooked. Prog.
prognathous: You are aware that there's a Spellchecker available for Mozilla, right? ;) http://spellchecker.mozdev.org/ (bug 56301)
Alex, neither Bug 56301 nor the Mozdev spellchecker are related to my suggestion. The difference is simple, both are targeted at other Mozilla components (Composer and Mail&News), while Bug 16409 is focused on the browser itself, Navigator. A good example is the textarea I'm using right now to write this message, I would love it to feature spellcheking as IE does with iespell. I hope it's clearer now. Prog.
Some of these bugs are fixed and assigned How can any bug that is fixed or assigned be dumb? Or do i misunderstand?
> Some of these bugs are fixed and assigned How can any bug that is fixed or > assigned be dumb? Or do i misunderstand? Because when they were added to this bug, they weren't fixed. :-)
Bug 161109: Make annoying animations (such as (text-decoration: blink;|<BLINK>) and <MARQUEE>) optional.
See comment #29 why bugs stay on this list even when they are fixed.
Bug 17483: News filters (yeah, like we're gonna attract people with absolutely *no* killfile capabilities).
I'd like to nominate <a href="http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148719">Bug 148719</a>: Advertising P3P features in Help when they don't exist in the build (and may never by the look of some of the comments in Bug 62399)
Bug 53422 In bookmarks, the Edit | Undo menu item doesn't activate at all Bug 90584 Codepage used for message displaying must be applied for Subject also Bug 158759 Printing a selection gives a black-on-black printout
I'd liek to nominate 85655 (copy & paste into TO: line ignores addresses after a CR) This is the one thing that our users complain about when we ask them to use Mozilla for Mail (we're trying to get them OFF Eudora without converting to Outlook) Simply put - you can't cut and paste a list of email addresses into the Compose window, an address book mailing list edit window, etc. You can only paste one address at a time. Think about it - to create a large mailing list in Mozilla, you have to type in or cut and paste each address instead of grabbing the whole list from an email, Excel, etc. I have a number of users who see this as the #1 issue in using Mozilla - otherwise they really like MailNews. This is something just about any mail client can handle. Mozilla Mailnews needs to be able to do this.
Hmmm...while I saw some merit in opening this tracking bug when it was opened, this has turned into a bug that anyone can add to and it now serves as a conduit to publicize 'my bug,' bugs which aren't really important on the grand scheme, but are annoying to one particular user. Not only does this accomplish nothing, but it is detrimental to those bugs that were originally put here in (for lack of a less harsh term) good faith; it's being abused, and perhaps it should be closed or at least looked at. I'm not about to remove dependencies and suffer the backlash, but this is getting pretty silly. That might be why it blocks bug 169476...
You are right. I have put "clean up that bug" on my to-do list a few days ago, but now it seems that I have to do something. 1. I resolve this bug as INVALID, as it mainly creates spam. 2. When Bugzilla allows tracking bugs that don't create as much spam as this one does, I'll either create a successor bug or reopen this bug and make it work the new way. Sorry, folks, for having to close this bug, and sorry for all the spam caused by the bug.
Re: Comment 87 Well, there is an interesting similar tracking bug, but in that case based on number of votes, CCs and duplicates. It's bug 163993: "[META] Mozilla Bugs with Large Community Interest". Criteria are 50/50/50 (votes or CCs or dups). There are some other bugs (bug 15806, bug 16508) suggesting the implementation of vote summary statistics.
Sent should behave exactly like the Templates folder, where messages when double clicked it is opened in a compose window instead of a view window, and when the message is sent, it stays in the folder (sent and templates).