Slashdot Mirror


Updated: Mozilla Community Contributor Departs Over Bug Handling

An anonymous reader writes "A blog post published by Mozilla community contributor Tyler Downer claims the Mozilla Triage QA process is broken, and he believes that the rapid release implementation does not work with their current method of handling bugs. Quoting: 'I understand that change takes time, and there is always a delay between planning a change, and the implementation. But with Triage, time is our enemy. We currently have 2,598 UNCO bugs in Firefox that haven’t been touched in 150 days. That is almost 2600 bugs that have not been touched since Firefox 4 was released. ... In Spring 2010, we hit roughly 13,000 UNCO bugs in the Firefox product on BMO. 13,000!!! We currently have 5,934. While this is an improvement, that is 6,000 bugs in Firefox that could be shipping today, and enhancements that could be making the web better (of course it isn’t that high, but the potential is there). This is several thousand contributors that we have told "Thank you for filing a bug report with us. We don’t really care about it, and we are going to let it sit for 6 months and just ask you to retest when you know it isn’t fixed, but thank you anyway."'" Update: 08/29 19:46 GMT by S : Downer has made another blog post clarifying the bug issue. Updated title and summary to reflect that he was a volunteer, not a Mozilla employee.

19 of 334 comments (clear)

  1. FF was good, then... by matt007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mozilla community is killing Firefox with their super-fast releases. we went from 4 to 7 in no time.. (i'm on the beta channel)
    Addons break non stop because of upgrades
    Bugs arent being fixed

    = Users will leave soon ?

    1. Re:FF was good, then... by LordLimecat · · Score: 5, Informative

      Way to read the article. Tyler specifically mentions in the first 10 sentences that he love Rapid Release, and it has absolutely nothing to do with his departure.

      His complaint is the same as the complaints have always been for Firefox-- it takes forever for bugs to get fixed.

    2. Re:FF was good, then... by 0123456 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why would they? I'm just a user and I had no problems with the fast releases.

      Because every new release is increasingly dumbed down and randomly removes user interface components or moves them around so you have to find them again and then remember where they were when you go back to an old version? And your only choice is either 3.6 or the current latest version because they now refuse to support any other versions?

      The only thing really keeping me on Firefox now is Noscript.

    3. Re:FF was good, then... by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm still waiting on a bug to be fixed that dates back to version 4 beta. It's not something trivial, I get a BSoD after about 15-20 minutes of regular use. I've looked online, I've submitted bugs, I've done just about everything they've suggested, save one: 'Turn off Crossfire whenever I use their browser', and frankly, that's in no way a real solution at all.

      Applications per se won't give you a BSOD, because that generally means something went horribly wrong in kernel mode. Sounds like the ATI drivers have a bug that causes a crash with Crossfire enabled, and Firefox can't rewrite those drivers for you.

  2. Zarro boogs found by johnwbyrd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh how the times have changed. For info about QA for Netscape 4.0, see this short refresher course:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarro_boogs

    --- cut here --

    The following comment is provided in the Bugzilla source code to developers who may be confused by this behaviour:
    Zarro Boogs Found
    This is just a goofy way of saying that there were no bugs found matching your query. When asked to explain this message, Terry Weissman (an early Bugzilla developer) had the following to say:
    I've been asked to explain this ... way back when, when Netscape released version 4.0 of its browser, we had a release party. Naturally, there had been a big push to try and fix every known bug before the release. Naturally, that hadn't actually happened. (This is not unique to Netscape or to 4.0; the same thing has happened with every software project I've ever seen.) Anyway, at the release party, T-shirts were handed out that said something like "Netscape 4.0: Zarro Boogs". Just like the software, the T-shirt had no known bugs. Uh-huh. So, when you query for a list of bugs, and it gets no results, you can think of this as a friendly reminder. Of *course* there are bugs matching your query, they just aren't in the bugsystem yet...
    --Terry Weissman

  3. Important Points; But Not a "Community Lead" by Gerv · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Mozilla has no such position as "Community Lead". Tyler was/is (he is still engaged in constructive discussion) a valued volunteer member of the Mozilla QA and triage community, but he does not have the title "Community Lead".

    There are several things which Mozilla's new more rapid release process has made a bit rocky, as Johnathan Nightingale, the Firefox development manager, noted in a recent blog post (syndicated at the Future of Firefox blog). This is one of them.

    And, of course, when Tyler says we have told bug reporters we don't care about their bug reports, that's not actually true. He is suggesting that this is what it might seem like. And clearly, it's not great when a bug report is filed and just sits there for months. Mozilla's success has made this a perennial problem for the last decade. We've cracked it, to a degree, before and I'm sure we can do it again.

  4. Before the flames begin... by LordLimecat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just to clear some things up and possibly prevent irrelevant posts...

    This has nothing to do with the rapid-release; he states in the 2nd paragraph that

    First off, I did not leave because of rapid release. I love the idea of rapid release, and I think the recent spurt of posts to the planet on how Rapid Release will be beneficial in the long run does a great job of explaining it.

    His issue is that Triage isnt good enough for rapid release-- not that rapid-release doesnt work with Triage (but thanks for stirring the muck, anonymous reader / soulskill).

    But Id like a clarification-- if there were 13,000 bugs 15 months ago, and now there are 6000, doesnt that speak to massive improvement? Why not leave back in spring 2010?

    1. Re:Before the flames begin... by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are on a rapid release - we are NOT. Which means we are dropping FF support both internally and from supported browsers for our products. You made traditional QA impossible and support too expensive.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  5. This problem has infected so many FOSS projects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Firefox gets personas, syncs, tab groups, etc. instead of bug fixes.

    GNOME3.

    Unity.

    Version number treadmills.

    Ad nauseam.

    Change for the sake of change. Bleeding edge bullet points for the bloggers instead of bugfixes for the users.

    How about returning to our roots and building software which runs faster with less bugs. There are plenty of commercial options for those who want the glassy artwork and UI equivalent of smooth jazz.

    How about software for people who need to get things done.

    Remember when we took pride in something like Apache being vastly superior to IIS? Now the community seems to hang its head in shame that Mac has spiffier icons and a hipper dock or Chrome gets new version numbers on a faster schedule.

  6. Re:You're wrong about addons by SydShamino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All you have to do is open the xpi in e.g. 7zip or winrar, open the install.rdf in a text editor, search for maxVersion, and change it to match your version. Change it to something big, like 10, and you'll be in the clear for a long time.

    "All you have to do" fail for 90% of the people we talked into using Firefox a few years back.

    --
    It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  7. Re:What is UNCO? by Smallpond · · Score: 5, Informative

    I tried googling but all I get are hits about a college. No one ever defines what UNCO is. I even found INCO, but no definition for that either.

    UNCO is short for UNCONFIRMED, the state a bug is in between being filed and being rejected because its asking for something a general user would want.

  8. Re:I suspect that after this announcement... by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

    why reinvent the wheel?

    Because after long enough time, there's always someone who's irked about the performance of the wheel and wants to replace it with conveyor belts or robot legs. Sometimes even square wheels. And because we've done round wheels for so long, old lessons have faded or been deemed outdated and so we try it. Then it turns out it's not that great except for very limited use cases, but we're too deep invested and stubborn so we'll try fixing it. After a lot of fighting against windmills, we slowly reinvent and rediscover the reasons why we used a wheel in the first place. Then the cycle starts over. Same with most NIH projects, they start out as being radically different and then end up looking much the same after tackling the same challenges.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  9. Re:You're wrong about addons by WankersRevenge · · Score: 5, Informative

    All you have to do is open the xpi in e.g. 7zip or winrar, open the install.rdf in a text editor, search for maxVersion, and change it to match your version. Change it to something big, like 10, and you'll be in the clear for a long time.

    Holy shit ... I can't believe I just read that. That's not a solution. That's not even close to one. It may work for you and other developers, but for the average user, you might as well have them download another browser.

    What someone needs to do is actually fix the add-on code in firefox itself so that users don't have to jump through hoops for every release. This new release schedule is forcing people to avoid upgrading which is the last thing you want.

  10. Re:You're wrong about addons by SydShamino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I moved my parents onto Firefox (with a few key addons) so that I wouldn't have to do this kind of shit to keep their computer running. If I'm going to bother with anything, it would be to point them to the Opera or Chrome installer. That's easier than either of your suggestions, both for me and for them.

    --
    It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  11. Some Clarification. by Tyler+Downer · · Score: 5, Informative

    First off, I never intended my post to be taken in the way that it was. Simply because there are 6000 UNCO bugs in the Firefox product does not mean that Firefox has 6000 bugs in it. Out of all those bugs, the majority are going to be duplicates of other bugs, they are going to be user error, they are going to be bugs caused by a misbehaving extension that a user installed on Firefox, and so on. Out of all those 6000 bugs, I'd estimate at most there are 1000 REAL bugs in Firefox, and that is an extremely high guess. What I was trying to say is that without going through and triaging all those bugs, we have no way of knowing which are real and should be taken seriously, and which are not real bugs. If you read https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=fields.html#status, you will see: "This bug has recently been added to the database. Nobody has validated that this bug is true. Users who have the "canconfirm" permission set may confirm this bug, changing its state to NEW. Or, it may be directly resolved and marked RESOLVED. " An UNCO bug has not be confirmed yet, it needs to be marked as NEW before it is considered a real bug. So it isn't fair to say that Firefox shipped with 6000 bugs, but more that there are roughly 2600 bugs that haven't been touched in 150 days, which is far more worrisome to me. We will never be able to have 0 bugs, but we may at least have a quick response to the bugs we do get. That is what my whole blog post was about, quick responses, and treating our reporters fairly. Unfortunately, Conceivably Tech was too eager to get a shocking headline, and so misconstrued my points. If you come back to re-read my blog in a day or two, I'll post more clarifications.

  12. What? by bmo · · Score: 4, Funny

    >In Spring 2010, we hit roughly 13,000 UNCO bugs in the Firefox product on BMO.

    Don't blame this shit on me.

    --
    BMO

  13. Mozilla Foundation is badly managed. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Mozilla Foundation has always been badly managed. In the beginning it was managed by Winifred Mitchell Baker, a socially backward lawyer with no technical experience.

    Add-ons are the reason people use Firefox. Decisions are made that break Firefox Add-ons, without notice.

    Firefox is extremely important because it is the only browser that has such an extensive list of add-ons. (Unfortunately, Add-ons are also called "extensions" and "plug-ins".) For some uses, the add-ons are so convenient that they can be considered necessary.

    Firefox instability corrupts the Windows operating system. There is huge instability seen only by people who open many windows and tabs, and leave them open for a long time. (It is not necessary to say you don't experience this bug if you don't commonly have 30 or more windows with 100 or more tabs open for several hours. Those of us who must do research have needs different than the average user.) That particular Firefox instability has been there since version 1, perhaps 10 years ago. An example: Two days ago I had a crash in Firefox version 6.0 that did not generate a Talkback report.

    Mozilla Foundation Top 20 Excuses for Not Fixing Firefox Bugs (Last updated in 2009.)

    Here are the top 20 things Firefox and Mozilla developers say to those who report difficult bugs, collected over the last 8 years. See also the extensive information provided in this Slashdot comment, Firefox is the most unstable program in common use, and the links in the comment.
    1. Maybe this bug is fixed in the nightly build. [The same bug has been reported many, many times over a period of four years.]
    2. Yes, this bug exists, but other things are more important. [The bug eventually takes 100% of CPU power, and makes Windows XP unusable, even after Firefox is killed. The bug affects the heaviest users of Firefox.]
    3. Yes, this bug exists, but it is not a common occurrence. [Numerous users have reported the bug. See the links.]
    4. Works for me. [The bug is complicated to reproduce, so the developers did a simplified test, which didn't show the bug.]
    5. No one has posted a TalkBack report. [If they had read the bug report, they would know that there is never a TalkBack report, because the bug crashes TalkBack, too, or a TalkBack report is not generated. TalkBack does not generate a report if Firefox is hogging the CPU. TalkBack cannot generate a report if the bug takes 100% of the CPU time.]
    6. If you would just give us more information, we would fix this bug. [They didn't bother to reproduce the bug using the detailed information provided.]
    7. This bug report is a composite of other bugs, so this bug report is invalid. [The other bugs aren't specified.]
    8. You are using Firefox in a way that would crash any software. [But the same use does not crash any version of Opera.]
    9. I don't like the way you worded your bug report. [So, he didn't read it or think about it.]
    10. You should run a debugger and find what causes this problem yourself. [Then when you have done most of the work, tell us what causes the problem, and we may fix it.]
    11. Many bugs that are filed aren't important to 99.99% of the users.
    12. If you are saying bad things about Mozilla and Firefox, you must be trolling. [They say this even though Firefox and Mozilla instability is beginning to be reported in media such as Information Week. See the links to magazine articles in this Slashdot comment: Firefox is the most unstable program in common use
    13. Your problem is probably caused by using extensions. [These are extensions advertised on the Firefox and Mozilla web site, and recommended.]
    14. Your problem is probably caused by a corrupt profile. [The same bug has been reported many times over a period of four years. One of the reports discusses an extensive te
  14. Too many open bugs? by Ant+P. · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know of a troll who files bug reports just to piss people off; last time he tried to claim an About window displaying the same information as every other GUI app in existence is "a bug and confusing people". Maybe you should ban people like him from the system, just saying.

  15. Re:You're wrong about addons by _0xd0ad · · Score: 5, Funny

    it was well publicised that windows 2000 had 65,000 known bugs when released

    Sheesh, couldn't they have found another 536 bugs to make it a nice round number?