Rufus sent the following on Wed, 13 Mar 2013 18:52:16 -0700: > Jim G. wrote: > > Rufus sent the following on Tue, 12 Mar 2013 10:55:46 -0700: > >> Ray_Net wrote: > >>> Daniel wrote, On 12/03/2013 10:37: > >>>> Daniel wrote: > >>>>> Ant wrote: > >>>>>> On 3/11/2013 11:28 PM PT, David E. Ross typed: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> as someone here recently turned me onto free Usenet from > >>>>>>>> EternalSeptember, I'm following several groups again. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> When a post is cross-posted to two groups, and I follow both, is > >>>>>>>> there a > >>>>>>>> setting I can tweak so that reading the post in one group marks it as > >>>>>>>> read in both groups? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This is long-standing bug #43278, first submitted over 12 years ago. > >>>>>>> See <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43278>. Since this > >>>>>>> worked quite well with Netscape 4.7, I really do not know why it > >>>>>>> has not > >>>>>>> yet been fixed. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Wow, I guess no one cares to fix it? I just voted and subscribed. > >>>>> > >>>>> and that would explain why I got an update email on this bug tonight!! > >>>> > >>>> and a second one now!! At last, some activity!! > >>>> > >>> Anyway - who's care ? :-) > >>> The problem is because SM development use the wrong way philosophy. > >>> They need votes to correct a bug. > >>> They don't need votes of implementing a new stuff. > >>> In the real world, this is exactly the inverse: > >>> Votes are needed to implement a new gadget, if no vote, there is nobody > >>> interesting, so don't spend time to create the not needed stuff. > >>> For bugs, votes are not needed, because each bug needs to be resolved - > >>> thus creating a more perfect product. > >> > >> Second. > > > > I suspect that they'd love to do it that way if they had an unlimited > > number of people working on development, but it's probably an hours in > > the day sort of thing. I do agree, though, that it's hard to know what > > matters to people when you don't make it easy for them to (a) know that > > voting exists and (b) make it easy to get to the voting site. > > > > "Fixing" isn't "development". "Fixing" is fixing. Baseline > functionality should work, and continue to work, at a minimum.
As much as I'd like to see good crosspost management in SM and TB, I don't consider it "baseline functionality." You can still access groups, post to groups, etc. I might compare it to air conditioning in a car, in that *I* want it, but I'm well aware that the car will drive just fine without it. > I think the most annoying bugs are things that seem simpler than > developing new capability. I suspect that the key word there is "seem." My guess is that if the fix was easy, we would have seen it long ago. So for whatever reason, the fix must be challenging. > What's even more frustrating is when a user > files/follows a bug, gets a verification and target for a fix, and that > fix is subsequently ignored - two inter-related cases in point being > bugs 724293 and 74346. > > It seemed the team understands what is going on here, targeted a fix for > SM 2.10 (if "Milestone" means the same thing in the SM software world as > it does in mine), and yet both are *still* broken in SM 2.16.x. > > And somewhere along the way I even pointed out that the Profile Manager > appears to be using two differing code branches, given that invoke at > startup displays a newer graphic and Change Profile displays the old > NS-like graphic. I suspect that very few people run multiple profiles, so I can see why that might also be a low priority item. Certainly no one I know outside of the tech field does, anyway. > So...I can't use Profile Manager *and* the bug for not following the > on-disk path are still broke 6-odd releases post target and remain so. > > Granted, this isn't as "simple" a fix as the under-drawn Password drop > down, but it's longevity is impressive... It's just not a priority, I guess. And I can sort of understand it. USENET predates Mozilla by a lot of years, so most people on USENET were already fluent with another reader long ago. And newbies to USENET nowadays are more likely to think that Google Groups *is* USENET, so I just don't see a lot of people rallying to get the crosspost management that I would like to see. Like me, if crosspost management is important, they just continue to use a separate newsreader. It would be nice to not have to have separate programs for email and USENET, but there you have it. -- Jim G. [Insert your favorite clever tagline here.] _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
