Account confirmers, Anti-spam team, canmove, Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
4,083
edits
Philip Chee (talk | contribs) |
m (moved SeaMonkey:StatusMeetings:2010-11-30 to SeaMonkey/StatusMeetings/2010-11-30: / is a much nicer separator :)) |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
* Good further triage targets could come out of looking at the [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/report.cgi?query_format=report-table&format=table&action=wrap&x_axis_field=bug_status&y_axis_field=component&product=SeaMonkey&resolution=--- component bug counts], pick yours! | * Good further triage targets could come out of looking at the [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/report.cgi?query_format=report-table&format=table&action=wrap&x_axis_field=bug_status&y_axis_field=component&product=SeaMonkey&resolution=--- component bug counts], pick yours! | ||
* [https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey:Triage_Week Proposed SeaMonkey Triage Week] | * [https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey:Triage_Week Proposed SeaMonkey Triage Week] | ||
** | ** We have categories at [https://wiki.mozilla.org/SeaMonkey:Triage_Week#Categories SeaMonkey:Triage_Week#Categories] we want to look at, together with the dates that are hopefully ok. | ||
** We've decided to use the existing #seamonkey channel instead of creating a special purpose triage channel as this is a pretty quiet channel and the regulars are already here. | |||
** InvisibleSmiley will create a wikipage with instructions for people wanting to help who are not familiar with triaging. | |||
*** The General Information page will contain the UNCO/NEW bug searches that are already on the Categories page. | |||
** InvisibleSmiley suggested to concentrate first on the UNCO bugs and then on the NEW bugs. | |||
[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/chart.cgi?category=-All-&subcategory=-All-&name=1183&label0=SM-with-review%3F-requests&line0=1928&label1=SM-with-superreview%3F-requests&line1=1929>=1&labelgt=Grand+Total&datefrom=2009-07-15&dateto=&action-wrap=Chart+This+List Open reviews/flags]: [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&namedcmd=SeaMonkey%20%282%29%20/%20-All-%20/%20SM-with-review%3F-requests&series_id=1928&remaction=runseries 45 review] [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&namedcmd=SeaMonkey%20%282%29%20/%20-All-%20/%20SM-with-superreview%3F-requests&series_id=1929&remaction=runseries 18 super-review] [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?product=SeaMonkey&field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equals&value0-0-0=ui-review%3F 1 ui-review] [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?product=SeaMonkey&field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equals&value0-0-0=feedback%3F 4 feedback] | |||
Major wanted/needed features: | Major wanted/needed features: | ||
Line 93: | Line 99: | ||
* {{Bug|533908}} SeaMonkey Mail: tabs not restored [misak] | * {{Bug|533908}} SeaMonkey Mail: tabs not restored [misak] | ||
** | ** Has some updates on mail tab restore but depends on some mailtab work from Mnyromyr (needs tab persistence functions for our mailnews tabs). | ||
* {{Bug|570004}} Popup/"doorhanger" notifications [Neil] | * {{Bug|570004}} Popup/"doorhanger" notifications [Neil] | ||
** Implementation moved to {{Bug|595810}}. | ** Implementation moved to {{Bug|595810}}. | ||
** | ** waiting for two reviews. | ||
* {{Bug|566138}} Better integration with Windows 7 taskbar | * {{Bug|566138}} Better integration with Windows 7 taskbar | ||
** | ** No real progress. | ||
* {{Bug|576970}} Port Sync UI to SeaMonkey trunk [InvisibleSmiley] | * {{Bug|576970}} Port Sync UI to SeaMonkey trunk [InvisibleSmiley] | ||
** On hiatus since the very encouraging last review. | ** On hiatus since the very encouraging last review. | ||
* {{Bug|484968}} Make SeaMonkey tab bar scrollable to cope with tab overflow. | * {{Bug|484968}} Make SeaMonkey tab bar scrollable to cope with tab overflow [Ratty]. | ||
** Waiting for reviews. | ** Waiting for reviews. | ||
Line 264: | Line 270: | ||
=== Any other business? === | === Any other business? === | ||
* ? | * [Neil] Do we have a list of platform-specific reviewers? | ||
** Not at the moment. We are still waiting on the rework proposal from Callek for the project areas list, it's due in today. | |||
** [KaiRo] If in doubt, I'd be happy if we went with code review alone and trusting the coder that it works as it should for such cases. Along with a call for testing once it landed (in m.d.a.seamonkey and m.d.quality). |
edits