Jason Bassford wrote:
...
Such cheat sheets are the hallmark of poor user interface.
It's an interesting dilemma. If you put all of the cheat
information into the UI then you end up with a wildly unwieldly UI due
to its size. Nobody would be able to use if effectively. But if you
Chris Hoess wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gervase Markham wrote:
and cynical suggestions:
- ...go through the 31,074 Fixed bugs... (as a non-programmer who
cannot even estimate if a bug might be easy2fix)
This is not a cynical suggestion; it's a very good suggestion and I, for
one,
snip all
This discussion is pointless. It is clear to me that there is,
unfortunately, no interest in this topic.
I have grown weary of overgeneralizations of my motives:
- No list of bugs *alone* is going to...
- what he does with *any* bug that he is unhappy about, he started a
newsgroup
Jason Bassford wrote:
snip
In fact, I think you may have missed the point of the discussion.
It hasn't been about what you should be doing but what should be done
in general. This is, or should have been, a high level discussion
on strategy and principles, not about who, specifically,
and cynical suggestions:
- ...go through the 31,074 Fixed bugs... (as a non-programmer who
cannot even estimate if a bug might be easy2fix)
This is not a cynical suggestion; it's a very good suggestion and I, for
one, would like to see it implemented. Obviously, you wouldn't need to
go
Håkan Waara wrote:
About hacking backend... Usually, people start with the frontend to
become familiar with it. As they dig deeper, they also get to know the
backend.
Starting out with the backend immediately may be a little rough.
Our backend is built up using XP (cross-platform)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Peter Lairo wrote:
Let's use the definition of the mail6 keyword and expand it to include
all Mozilla components (not just mail). The name of the morphed keyword
doesn't have to be what I suggested, it could be something else. The
description could
it is identical to the mail6 keyword!
Let's analyze this.
You say they're identical, if so, then why duplicate it? We don't need your
keyword then.
You neglected to quote me correctly annd mention that I had also
(repeatedly) said the the mail6 should be morphed to include ALL
components
Peter Lairo wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have yet to find a situation where your keyword *does* apply.
Really? or whas that defensive rhetoric? What about bugs that only
require editing text (e.g. 123kb to 123 kb - add a space)?
Those aren't high reward, by any stretch of the
post-docs, etc. We used to have a bunch of referential materials and
readings for them to get acquainted with our protocols. I can tell you
that invariably, all of them always ended up ignoring that and going to
the jr. or senior members of the group for help and guidance. The
What
Mark Anderson wrote:
Peter Lairo wrote:
Really? or whas that defensive rhetoric? What about bugs that only
require editing text (e.g. 123kb to 123 kb - add a space)?
Those aren't high reward, by any stretch of the word.
the name of the keyword is *not* what is important. I have long since
RV wrote:
Peter Lairo wrote:
We are not suggesting that it would *eliminate* the need to talk to
real people, simply *reduce* it.
and that while better documentation (looking for volunteers.)
Just copy and paste the reply you gave to Andrew on 13.08.01, edit it
to include all OS's and
quite knowledgable about group process dynamics and development and I
can tell you that pasting a static page with lots of pointers doesn't
necessarily help new people to join the project. It actually makes it
No, that's true. But that doesn't mean that posting a static link
Peter Lairo wrote:
the name of the keyword is *not* what is important. I have long since
suggested easy2fix or *whatever*. The important issue is to get a
keyword of bugs that newbies and other persons with limmited time can
work on.
But then you need to listen to what Blake, Asa, and Ian
Peter Lairo wrote:
You neglected to quote me correctly annd mention that I had also
(repeatedly) said the the mail6 should be morphed to include ALL
components (not just mail)!
I paraphrased. Mail6 will be going away soon, IIRC. Mail6 should not be changed
if it was staying anyway. If
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Peter Lairo wrote:
I would propose, however, that you morph the mail6 keyword into a
*LoRiskHiReward* or *easy2fix* keyword that applies to all Mozilla
components.
We could at least spell them right.
Repeat after me:
Low risk high reward
Easy
Peter Lairo wrote:
OK, for all the pedantic, anal retentive people who would rather
obscure the issue and ridicule those who are trying to improve the
system:
PPPS. Insults are the arguments of those who have no arguments. (J.J.
Rousseau, schw.-frz. Phil., 1712-1778)
OMG, after all
For example, until ten years or so ago, most of New Zealand had only
three TV channels. This allowed the user interface for choosing a
channel to be really simple -- my family's TV set, for example, has four
buttons, labelled `1' through `4'. Now, however, when many of us have
Doh! I just
Matthew Thomas wrote:
Jason Bassford wrote:
massive snip
No. All this discussion is evidence of is that Peter Lairo likes adding
keywords to bugs. This fact is well-known to anyone who gets a lot of
bugmail involving the front end of Mozilla, since a noticable proportion
of said bugmail
RV wrote:
Peter Lairo wrote:
OK, for all the pedantic, anal retentive people who would rather
obscure the issue and ridicule those who are trying to improve the
system:
PPPS. Insults are the arguments of those who have no arguments. (J.J.
Rousseau, schw.-frz. Phil., 1712-1778)
Peter Lairo wrote:
Maybe you're too focused on getting the list smaller at all costs, and
therefore refusing to accept even a beneficial new keyword.
Low rick and high reward bugs are highly subjective, and a new keyword to
further clutter things up is inviting abuse.
it is
Peter Lairo wrote:
RV wrote:
Peter Lairo wrote:
OK, for all the pedantic, anal retentive people who would rather
obscure the issue and ridicule those who are trying to improve the
system:
PPPS. Insults are the arguments of those who have no arguments. (J.J.
Rousseau, schw.-frz.
Jason Bassford wrote:
first thing I'd recommend is getting to know some of the other Mac
developers on the project. Check out the netscape.public.mozilla.mac
newsgroup and maybe introduce yourself there. If you haven't already,
start downloading daily Fizzilla builds
...and more
Peter Lairo wrote:
Actually, my plan is to annihilate this commi free-for-all project, Ha
Ha H H (now imagine thunder and lightning accompanying
my sinister bellowing laughter). Well meaning fools, I will destroy
you in the end.
Sounds like JTK to me
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], RV says...
Peter Lairo wrote:
Actually, my plan is to annihilate this commi free-for-all project, Ha
Ha H H (now imagine thunder and lightning accompanying
my sinister bellowing laughter). Well meaning fools, I will destroy
you in the
Please capitalize more things or put them in asteriks. I'm having
trouble understanding what it is you wish to emphasize.
--Blake
Peter Lairo wrote:
You have put together a list. I don't see a bunch of newbie Mozilla
hackers jumping on those bugs and fixing them. What makes you think
Peter Lairo wrote:
As I have pointed out MANY times, I am no programmer.
And obviously, neither do you know what it takes to /become/ a Mozilla
programmer. This whole discussion is ridiculous.
--
Håkan Waara ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Jason Bassford wrote:
in coding, I wish there was an easier way to identify good ways to get
my feet wet. Maybe Peter's specific suggestion is wrong, but his
motivations are good.
I agree. I'm not stuck up on the keyword itself specifically
either, I'm just trying to get help for
Peter Lairo wrote:
You have put together a list. I don't see a bunch of newbie Mozilla
hackers jumping on those bugs and fixing them. What makes you think
that if the 20 or so bugs in your list had a keyword that would be any
different. I'm arguing that a keywords doesn't help anything.
Andrew MacDonald wrote:
I know C++ (did some OS hacking; network hacking at school last year), I
know some javascript, but that was a while ago. I've messed around a bit
in XML doing some work for a company last year, but I can't say it was a
huge experience. I'm very familiar with HTML -
Asa Dotzler wrote:
Andrew MacDonald wrote:
snip
I wish there was an easier way to identify good ways to get
my feet wet.
Andrew, because Peter thinks his keyword is really useful I'm giving you
a list of bugs that Peter has determined to be low risk (they're not,
trust me) and
Garth Wallace wrote:
Peter Lairo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Bernd Mielke wrote:
The only thing I've seen is that you have been the author of all
bugs in the list.
That is currently the *only quick way* to find LoRiskHiReward bugs -
Peter Lairo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Bernd Mielke wrote:
The only thing I've seen is that you have been the author of all
bugs in the list.
That is currently the *only quick way* to find LoRiskHiReward bugs - if
you know them
Blake Ross wrote:
I don't believe this would be a useful keyword, but rather another in a
long and growing list of cruft.
Well, this may be some of the very rare cruft that is actually aimed at
novices. Surely the rest is unused or used mostly by (the very few)
experienced developers
1.
Peter,
I red the bug before posting :-;. I screened also the buglist you have
provided and could not see a single patch provided by you. The only
thing I've seen is that you have been the author of all bugs in the
list. I deny that you are able to judge the risk vs reward as long as
you do
Hi,
I recently filed a bug on an *important feature* that has the potential
to get many more people involved in helping with Mozilla. It is:
Need a keyword for *low risk - high reward* bugs (not just for mailnews)
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68156
This bug is being shot down by
A lot of non-developers have often complained that their enhancement
bugs and feature requests are ignored because developers focus more on
crasher bugs (which is OK).
Since many *enhancement* bugs are in fact *LoRiskHiReward* this Keyword
might provide an easy way for outside/casual
I don't see any good in this keyword, if a bug is really easy for *you*
to fix, go and fix it and forget about it. And most of the times you
will never know in advance how difficult the bug is until you have fixed
it. I think *easy* is relative and depends on your knowledge. I would be
I don't believe this would be a useful keyword, but rather another in a long
and growing list of cruft.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
1. This new KW would be most beneficial in getting the attention of
*novice programmers* and experienced programmers who need a short
break/diversion/easy success to
Bernd Mielke wrote:
I don't see any good in this keyword, if a bug is really easy for *you*
to fix, go and fix it and forget about it. And most of the times you
will never know in advance how difficult the bug is until you have fixed
it. I think *easy* is relative and depends on your
40 matches
Mail list logo
