In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, dman84 wrote: > Chris, that is where I come in. I have a project that I'd like to start > after mozilla's 1.0 codebase is API fixed.. to then create a new bugzill > a tool.. that will help this problem. I need to learn the programming > of the XUL & XML, and probably how all the XPCOM & XPAPPS, Tools & > Widgets stuff work.. which hopefully done right, would allow this vision > I have to come to fruitation. It will greatly easy bugzilla's problem.
Is this related to the Bugzapp! project I've heard of? Can you be a little more explicit? I'm curious... > I would need to write specs first too. It only exists as a project > idea on paper. My current time is taken to help mozilla get to the 1.0 > status.. and to download/test as many nightlies as I can for my w2k box. It's good to know someone else is out there triaging ;-) I should be back in action as soon as I get CVS unhorked (bad maintainer, bad...) > I used to work for a development company where I did a lot of beta > testing and I have a degree in CIS. Right now I have a physically > intensive labor job which pays really good, yet really wears me down.. > and cuts down my time to actually learn more about mozilla. But I am > looking for better.. testing code is by far easier than actually writing > it and fixing it without codebase knowledge. One area I think that > would be helpful, is a download file that mozilla compiles to get > everything working on a certain platform, then just telling us to > download this problem, write this here.. etc, just shy of distribution > of pay-software programs. I just dont have to time to get a machine up > and running just so I can spend forever trying to figure out how to get > it compile. > Admittedly, I've only ever built on a Linux box, but I get the impression that if you've installed Cygwin (which is pretty much a prerequisite for Unix-ish development on a Win32 box) and have VC++, it's not tremendously difficult to build. I do enjoy the ability with custom builds to specify optimization level (I have it cranked to -O3 at the moment), and get a build with "all the trimmings" of extensions, so to speak. OTOH, setting up tests is nothing to sneeze at, either. <URL:http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS3/Selectors/20020115/>, the CSS3 Selectors test, <URL:http://www.bath.ac.uk/~py8ieh/internet/eviltests/>, <URL:http://www.hixie.ch/tests/>, <URL:http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/css/test>, <URL:http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dbaron/dom/test>, are all nice big test collections; I know there's a bunch of DOM stuff out there, too, such as <URL:http://xw2k.sdct.itl.nist.gov/xml/page6.html>. The scary part is that this still only scratches the surface of the things you can do with layout...apparently there are some broken parser tests, too, which I'd like to work on reviving when my shipment of round tuits comes in. It's probably not possible, given the current setup of Bugzilla, but it would be neat to see a standards testsuite tightly integrated with it. -- Chris Hoess
