On 21.09.2010 10:11, Ray_Net wrote: --- Original Message ---
> Jay Garcia wrote: >> On 20.09.2010 16:09, Ray_Net wrote: >> >> --- Original Message --- >> >>> W3BNR wrote: >>>> On 9/20/2010 5:05 AM Ray_Net wrote: >>>>> Philip Chee wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 10:20:48 -0400, Phillip Jones wrote: >>>>>>> Jay Garcia wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> That is not true, please stop spreading misinformation. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've never seen a case where developers corrected a bug a user >>>>>>> found. >>>>>> >>>>>> You are not looking hard enough. Look harder. I fixed the following >>>>>> bugs: >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug 86400 reported by David Carroll >>>>>> Bug 156734 reported by Jeremy M. Dolan >>>>>> Bug 388349 reported by Ed >>>>>> Bug 395371 reported by arno renevier >>>>>> Bug 414014 reported by Eyal Rozenberg >>>>>> Bug 482433 reported by Chris Wimlett >>>>>> Bug 534248 reported by Aleksej >>>>>> Bug 534322 reported by Kevin Brosnan >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually I fixed more but I got bored searching through bugzilla. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Could you fix this >>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218258 >>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=595696 >>>>> >>>>> or tell me how can i fix it >>>> >>>> "Bug" 218258 - only 28 votes in 7 years? I don't think it will get >>>> "fixed". More of a new feature request than a bug. >>> >>> Only 28 votes .... and you forgot the huge list of bugs closed because a >>> duplicate of this one. >>> >>>> Anyhow 'gator' on April 4, 2010, suggested a work-a-round. See comment >>>> #61 at the bug page. This should satisfy the few that need the >>>> function. >>> >>> NO this doesnot statify the request - In addition the asked thing is >>> already coded in the forward mechanism - this mechanism could be easely >>> called when doing a "reply" - this not a great job to be done. >>>> >>> >>> You speak about the fact that this bug should be an RFE .... this why i >>> created https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=595696 which is a >>> RFE ... this RFE will stay at it is for another cycle of 7 years or >>> more. As Phillip Jones said: 'developers believe that users can't know >>> what they want, that only developers know what users want. And tend to >>> ignore users wishes.' and i add : Evenwhile if the work to be done is >>> mimimal. >> >> If it's "minimal" than add a comment to your RFE explaining the minimal >> steps in detail so that programmers reading it will get it and do it in >> their spare time. >> > if you read the text, you will imediately see that's a minimal work - in > short: > 1. Create an option named "Reply-header-like-forward" and use it when > replying to a mail is this way: > > If Reply-header-like-forward is true then > call <forward-header-composition>; > > --------------------------- > If i know how to modify SeaMonkey, i can give a try. That is not programming steps needed to upgrade the module(s) necessary to effect the change(s). If it's that simple then do it. I understand what you are saying to do but it needs a programmer to write the code necessary, etc. And THAT is not that simple. Then you need someone capable to take the time. In open-source it's not always a simple task to attract a contributor away from what they do for a living as well as fix bugs for free and so on in the time they already have dedicated. Good luck. -- *Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion* www.ufaq.org Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Flock - Thunderbird _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
