Open
Bug 3746
Opened 26 years ago
Updated 2 years ago
Warnings for USENET etiquette errors required by GNKSA
Categories
(MailNews Core :: Composition, enhancement, P5)
MailNews Core
Composition
Tracking
(Not tracked)
NEW
People
(Reporter: phil, Unassigned)
References
(Depends on 2 open bugs, Blocks 1 open bug, )
Details
(Keywords: helpwanted, Whiteboard: 15b, 16e still needed)
This is one of the "failing" items in the Good Netkeeping Seal of Approval (see
URL above). There are a couple of common user errors which we should warn about.
IMO, these warnings should include a "don't warn me again" checkbox in the
dialog.
> 16a Does not warn when posting an empty article
> 16c Does not warn when posting quoted text only
> 16e Does not warn against inadvertent multiple postings
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•26 years ago
|
||
Also:
> 15b Does not warn on, or refuse, excessive signatures
Stacey - if you think Esther should be the QA contact, please change
accordingly.
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•26 years ago
|
||
JF, is this more a compose bug, or more a news bug (for sspitzer?)
Updated•26 years ago
|
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Comment 4•26 years ago
|
||
Phil, I don't have any clue what that means! message compose isn't yet really
ready to support newsgroups posting. The code should be here but hasn't ever
been validated.
Reporter | ||
Updated•26 years ago
|
Target Milestone: M9
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•26 years ago
|
||
> I don't have any clue what that means!
The bug means that we allow the user to do some things which are bad form on
USENET. The suggestion is that we show the user a warning (probably with a
"don't ask me again" checkbox) when the user does these things.
M9
Updated•26 years ago
|
Target Milestone: M9 → M11
Comment 7•26 years ago
|
||
My guess is that this isn't getting done by M9. So I'll move to M11. You can
retarget if you want.
Updated•25 years ago
|
Target Milestone: M11 → M14
Comment 9•25 years ago
|
||
M14
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•25 years ago
|
||
As a point of reference, the old 4.x MSG_CompositionPane had a SanityCheck
function which was invoked on a message at send-time. We used that opportunity
to check for a bunch of errors, like no subject, or no body. You might make sure
that logic is maintained in mozilla, and add these netiquette errors to that
code.
Comment 11•25 years ago
|
||
We still have a SanityCheck function: mime_sanity_check_fields, just need to extend/update it...
Updated•25 years ago
|
QA Contact: scurtis → huang
Comment 12•25 years ago
|
||
Change QA Contact to me since it's my feature now.
Reporter | ||
Updated•25 years ago
|
Target Milestone: M14 → M15
Comment 13•25 years ago
|
||
Mass moving to M16 to get these off the M15 radar. Please let me know if this
is really an M15 stopper.
Target Milestone: M15 → M16
Comment 14•25 years ago
|
||
Need help.
Assignee: ducarroz → nobody
Severity: normal → enhancement
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Keywords: helpwanted
Target Milestone: M16 → M30
Comment 15•25 years ago
|
||
If at all possible, methinks we should try to satisfy all of the NS failings at
http://www.xs4all.nl/~js/gnksa/Evaluations/netscape-communicator-4.5.txt
Have we inadvertently fixed some of them without specifically trying to?
Comment 16•25 years ago
|
||
self->cc, sorry for spam
Comment 17•25 years ago
|
||
This is a GNKSA MUST, adjusting SUMMARY.
Summary: Should have optional warnings for USENET etiquette errors → Must have optional warnings for USENET etiquette errors
Comment 18•24 years ago
|
||
reassigning to me to take a look
Assignee: nobody → BlakeR1234
Priority: P3 → P5
Target Milestone: M30 → Future
Updated•24 years ago
|
Assignee: blakeross → mozilla
Comment 19•24 years ago
|
||
I don't have time right now. to Ben for now, who could probably do this
fairly easily.
(I don't understand why this sanity check is in C++ and not JS/XUL, where it
seems easily enough to implement)
Comment 20•24 years ago
|
||
> I don't understand why this sanity check is in C++ and not JS/XUL, where it
> seems easily enough to implement
C++ is not inherently harder than JS. I like to keep the backend in C++, because
that way, you can write a new frontend (which doesn't know about JS) without
rewriting half the app.
Accepting and targetting Mozilla 1.0, but I don't know, if I will get to it,
unless we define non-GNKSA-compliance as a Mozilla 1.0-blocker (which I
propose). We have much worse problems right now :-( (e.g. LDAP).
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Target Milestone: Future → mozilla1.0
Comment 21•24 years ago
|
||
I still think stuff like this belongs in the JS. cc'ing brendan for thoughts
Comment 22•24 years ago
|
||
This is not a frontend bug. Warnings are logic. *Displaying* the warnings is
frontend.
Comment 23•24 years ago
|
||
This is a discussion that belongs in the newsgroups, but...
By your logic, we have lots of JS that needs to move to C++.
JS is not and has never been purely for "frontend" (not sure what you mean by
that..wouldn't that be xul, css, etc.?) C++ should be for the "glue" code,
e.g. the base code that ties everything above it together, e.g. stuff that
really is best done in a programming language like C++. I still think that
simple sanity checks such as these are best handled in JavaScript, and am
hoping that Brendan can shed more light here.
Comment 24•24 years ago
|
||
> This is a discussion that belongs in the newsgroups, but...
Then do so and post a link here.
> we have lots of JS that needs to move to C++
Which one?
> not sure what you mean by that..
Frontend is the presentation, and nothing else.
> wouldn't that be xul, css, etc.?)
You cannot program in XUL. The frontend also needs code.
> I still think that simple sanity checks
It's not a matter os simplicity. It stops being simple, if you create e.g. a
GNOME frontend for Mailnews, because then you have to reprogram all this
"simple" logic stuff -> simplicity lost, redundancy introduced.
Comment 25•24 years ago
|
||
Why do you have to reprogram it if you create a GNOME frontend? C++ should be
the bare minimum, especially for embedding purposes (although I guess that's
not an issue in the case of mail?) What if different programs want their own
sanity rules?
Comment 26•24 years ago
|
||
Ben, there is nothing inherent in "back-end" code that precludes using JS as an
implementation language, and we have JS implementations in the back-end. Stop
lumping JS together with front-end, and try learning JS so you don't have to
write so much nsString code in C++ (and take your life in your hands with leaks
and bad pointer crashes).
Blake: JS can be "glue" too (Perl is duct tape). JS is just another programming
language, with different trade-offs than C++, but with broad application (not
only for UI).
I detest religion that says "use this language *only* for some class of code".
More in a bit.
/be
Comment 27•24 years ago
|
||
> C++ should be the bare minimum, especially for embedding purposes
Right, but JS isn't. This is my whole point.
> What if different programs want their own sanity rules?
The applicability of these rules doesn't depend on the frontend. The rules are
the same, no matter, if the frontend is XUL, HTML (Webmail), Palm or GNOME.
If you really want to alter them - you have the source. For embedders, changing
C++ code is not harder than changing JS code.
> there is nothing inherent in "back-end" code that precludes using JS as an
> implementation language
There is: you need a JS interpreter.
Anyway, it seemed to me that blake didn't suggest to write IDL interfaces for
these checks (however these interfaces might look like), but write the checks in
the frontend code, in particular in
mailnews/base/resources/content/something.js, which will indeed not exist at all
for embedded Mailnews.
> and we have JS implementations in the back-end.
Which ones?
> JS is just another programming language
Sure.
Comment 28•24 years ago
|
||
> > there is nothing inherent in "back-end" code that precludes using JS as an
> > implementation language
..for embedded apps.
> There is: you need a JS interpreter.
Otherwise, you're right - there isn't.
Comment 29•24 years ago
|
||
> Right, but JS isn't. This is my whole point
Sanity checks should not be considered "bare minimum" because different clients
could have different ideas about what's "sane" and what's not. Bare minimum
should be the ability to send an email. Frills like checking whether the user
is posting only quoted text to a newsgroup isn't.
Comment 30•24 years ago
|
||
> different clients could have different ideas about what's "sane" and what's not.
This is arguable, I completely disagree. The point of GNKSA is that is applies
to all clients. GNKSA complicance, once achieved, is a *core feature* of
Mailnews. If you want to change it, you change the nature of Mailnews.
However, the checks in this bug will propably depend on a pref anyway (because
individual users might not like them), so embedders/distributors disagreeing
with us could just change the pref anyway.
Comment 31•24 years ago
|
||
Changing personal priorities. Giving away most of my bugs :-( (reassigning to
default owner).
I will still track these bugs closely. If you need my input, feel free to ask me.
New owner: Please do *not* close these bugs (as WONTFIX or whatever you may
find) unless they are fixed. Rather, reassign to <nobody@mozilla.org>, if you
don't want to work on them.
Assignee: mozilla → ducarroz
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
QA Contact: huang → esther
Target Milestone: mozilla1.0 → ---
Updated•24 years ago
|
QA Contact: esther → huang
Updated•24 years ago
|
Keywords: mozilla1.1
Comment 32•24 years ago
|
||
> 16a Does not warn when posting an empty article
This is already fixed.
> 16a Does not warn when posting an empty article
This won't ever happen because we always append some whitespace.
> 16e Does not warn against inadvertent multiple postings
Can someone defined "inadvertent multiple postings"
> 15b Does not warn on, or refuse, excessive signatures
Define "excessive signatures".
Comment 33•24 years ago
|
||
> > 16a Does not warn when posting an empty article
>
> This is already fixed.
>
> > 16a Does not warn when posting an empty article
>
> This won't ever happen because we always append some whitespace.
huh? Is it fixed, or will it never happen?
BTW: "We append some whitespace" is not an argument. Then ignore that
whitespace. (Compare our message analysis for the HTML question dialog.)
> Define "excessive signatures".
Longer than 4 lines or any line longer than 80 chars.
Comment 34•24 years ago
|
||
The second 16a in my previous comment should have been:
> 16c Does not warn when posting quoted text only
Comment 35•24 years ago
|
||
That's trivial to catch, and the code already exists in the HTML recognizer (for
the HTML question dialog). You just need to copy the code and cut it down a lot.
Or reorganize it, but that's not trivial anymore :-/.
Comment 36•24 years ago
|
||
Ben, can't you fix this bug? You know the mime fu better than me. :)
Comment 37•24 years ago
|
||
Not sure, I might. But you do the UI ;). In any case, I can help you with
pointers to the right code.
Comment 38•24 years ago
|
||
I am not planning to work on this bug.
Comment 39•24 years ago
|
||
BTW, 15b is bug 45137.
So all you have to do to fix this bug:
> 16c Does not warn when posting quoted text only
> 16e Does not warn against inadvertent multiple postings
Comment 40•24 years ago
|
||
Based on the original reporter's comments, this bug is related to compose/news
problem. Change QA contact to Sheela & Ccing Stephen.
QA Contact: huang → sheelar
Updated•23 years ago
|
Target Milestone: mozilla0.9.7 → mozilla1.0.1
Updated•23 years ago
|
QA Contact: sheelar → stephend
Comment 42•23 years ago
|
||
add myself to cc
Comment 43•21 years ago
|
||
Changing the summary to reflect the scope. The way it was, it looks like a
catch-all RFE for Usenetiquette errors in general.
Summary: Must have optional warnings for USENET etiquette errors → Optional warnings for USENET etiquette errors required by GNKSA
Updated•21 years ago
|
Blocks: usenetiquette
Updated•21 years ago
|
Summary: Optional warnings for USENET etiquette errors required by GNKSA → Warnings for USENET etiquette errors required by GNKSA
Target Milestone: mozilla1.0.1 → ---
Updated•20 years ago
|
Product: MailNews → Core
Comment 44•17 years ago
|
||
Bringing love and recognition to an open 4-digit bug.
Assignee: ducarroz → nobody
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
QA Contact: stephend → composition
Whiteboard: 15b, 16e still needed
Assignee | ||
Updated•16 years ago
|
Product: Core → MailNews Core
Updated•2 years ago
|
Severity: normal → S3
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•