GNU bug report logs - #22115
WWW: Package Issues website has broken CSS

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 22115 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 22115 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jan Synáček <jan.synacek <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: WWW: Package Issues website has broken CSS
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 09:39:39 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

The rendering of [1] is broken for me. I'm using Firefox 42.0.
See attached screenshots.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/issues.html

-- 
Jan Synáček

[scr-left.png (image/png, attachment)]

[scr-right.png (image/png, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ng0 <ngillmann <at> runbox.com>
To: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 16:50:44 +0000

Hi,

Firefox 47.0.1, windows 7: no broken css.

Is this enough to close this bug?
-- 
              ng0

Message #11 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ng0 <ngillmann <at> runbox.com>
To: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#22115:
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 17:37:55 +0000

ng0 <ngillmann <at> runbox.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Firefox 47.0.1, windows 7: no broken css.
>
> Is this enough to close this bug?

Otherwise I'd say we need more input on how this specific firefox
renders the page, the implemented css support, the proof that the person
who reported this bug has experienced this bug with no added
addons/extensions, etc (basically: is is reproducible, and if yes, how?
... that's why I want (in the future) what Gentoo is doing for
Chrom(e/ium) / Firefox based browsers, a global extensions store.. And
to eliminate the need to contact mozilla/google cdn servers about
addons, and some more reasons).
-- 
              ng0

Message #14 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: ng0 <ngillmann <at> runbox.com>
Cc: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#22115:
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 13:53:51 -0400

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 04:50:44PM +0000, ng0 wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Firefox 47.0.1, windows 7: no broken css.

It looks broken to me in Debian's Firefox 45.3.0 and Chromium
52.0.2743.116.

Message #17 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org>
To: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 20:12:29 -0500

This issue is solved in the repository of the website:

http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix/guix-artwork.git/commit/?id=85a782924d260164df281f5dee328674d2e190a9

The change will be visible for users soon.


-- 
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
http://sirgazil.bitbucket.org/

Message #20 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org>
To: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: (no subject)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 20:36:05 -0500

This bug is fixed in the website now:

https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/issues.html


-- 
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
http://sirgazil.bitbucket.org/

Message #25 received at 22115-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org>
To: 22115-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: (no subject)
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 14:14:39 -0500

Fixed.

-- 
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
http://sirgazil.bitbucket.org/

Message #28 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org>
Cc: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#22115: (no subject)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 11:14:50 +0100

Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org> skribis:

> This bug is fixed in the website now:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/issues.html

It really looks nicer this way, thank you!

Initially the reason to include all the packages on this page (not just
those having issues) was that we could have links from, say,
/packages/c.html#coreutils to /packages/issues.html#coreutils.  However
that never happened.

Should we just list packages with actual issues?  Or should we add those
links?

Ludo’.

Message #31 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org
Cc: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#22115: (no subject)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 09:30:42 -0500

On 2016-12-18 05:14, ludo <at> gnu.org wrote:
> Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org> skribis:
> 
>> This bug is fixed in the website now:
>> 
>> https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/packages/issues.html
> 
> It really looks nicer this way, thank you!
> 
> Initially the reason to include all the packages on this page (not just
> those having issues) was that we could have links from, say,
> /packages/c.html#coreutils to /packages/issues.html#coreutils.  However
> that never happened.


I was going to ask why list all packages, but focused on the bug instead 
:)


> Should we just list packages with actual issues?  Or should we add 
> those
> links?


For now, I'd remove the packages without issues. This would help reduce 
the size of the page, which is almost 2 MiB (I use 1 MiB as a limit for 
desktop browsers).

Soon™, I'd like to propose a package pages design where the package-list 
page indicates if a package has issues, and the package issues are 
listed in a package detail page (which does not exist yet). The current 
issues page would disappear. But I'll open a separate bug/proposal for 
this :)


-- 
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
http://sirgazil.bitbucket.org/

Message #34 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org>
Cc: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#22115: (no subject)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 22:51:28 +0100

Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org> skribis:

> On 2016-12-18 05:14, ludo <at> gnu.org wrote:

[...]

>> Should we just list packages with actual issues?  Or should we add
>> those
>> links?
>
>
> For now, I'd remove the packages without issues. This would help
> reduce the size of the page, which is almost 2 MiB (I use 1 MiB as a
> limit for desktop browsers).

Sounds good.  Would you like to make this change?

> Soon™, I'd like to propose a package pages design where the
> package-list page indicates if a package has issues, and the package
> issues are listed in a package detail page (which does not exist
> yet). The current issues page would disappear. But I'll open a
> separate bug/proposal for this :)

That would be nice!  Looking forward to this.  :-)

Thanks for your feedback,
Ludo’.

Message #37 received at 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org>
To: ludo <at> gnu.org
Cc: 22115 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#22115: (no subject)
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 11:49:43 -0500

On 2016-12-18 16:51, ludo <at> gnu.org wrote:
> Luis Felipe López Acevedo <felipe.lopez <at> openmailbox.org> skribis:
> 
>> On 2016-12-18 05:14, ludo <at> gnu.org wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> Should we just list packages with actual issues?  Or should we add
>>> those
>>> links?
>> 
>> 
>> For now, I'd remove the packages without issues. This would help
>> reduce the size of the page, which is almost 2 MiB (I use 1 MiB as a
>> limit for desktop browsers).
> 
> Sounds good.  Would you like to make this change?


I don't have much time this month, so if someone else can fix it, great. 
If not, I still have it on my TODO.


-- 
Luis Felipe López Acevedo
http://sirgazil.bitbucket.org/

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.