Comodo dragon not supported...

[Robyn]

So I read in my bug thread that ProBoards support support CD.

Yet for the past year I've been reporting bugs, usually under the browser, and it's been fixed.

Why the sudden change in plans?

Also, Comodo Dragon is literately just Chromium which is thus Chrome, only with privacy features removed, so shouldn't html, javascript and the like function just the same in Dragon as it does it Chrome?

[VS Admin]

Its better to use Chrome to determine if they are actually bugs or just a bad implementation of chromium. We can't support obscure browsers that 0.0001% of people use. IE7 already takes around 20% of our development time to support and it's an ancient web browser. We choose to specifically support the most popular browsers.

[Ryan Roos]

Comodo Dragon is not one of our supported browsers.

Bugs you were reporting were also broken in other browsers when we tested, usually Chrome or Firefox.

[Robyn]

What I'm confused is why you treat Dragon different from Chrome. I have no problem testing v5 on other browsers (in fact I asked a while ago which ones weren't being tested as much so I could help out, but got no answer) but just now Dragon is not being supported. What confuses me is why you accepted my older bugs, and why Dragon is being considered a different browser from Chrome.

May 3, 2012 8:38:39 GMT -8 Ryan Roos said:

Comodo Dragon is not one of our supported browsers.

Bugs you were reporting were also broken in other browsers when we tested, usually Chrome or Firefox.

Again, can someone tell me what differences there are between Dragon and Chrome that cause you to not support it? I understand if I used something crazy that no one used and it ran under a different rendering template (or whatever they are called).

But Dragon is basically Chrome without privacy features, so again what is the difference?

[VS Admin]

It is not the same exact browser as Chrome, there are differences. We can not test issues in obscure browsers. This slows our development time and doesn't benefit any majority of our users.

If the issue is in Chrome, please report it as a Chrome bug and it will get fixed. But if the issue only happens in Comodo Dragon then obviously it's a Comodo bug.

[Robyn]

Patrick, I do understand what you are saying. And I agree, it's a pain to support browsers that no one but one or two members use.

But I do want to understand the technical differences. Are there certain codes or anything that Dragon renders differently than Chrome? What exactly is different when it comes to website?

[Ryan Roos]

May 3, 2012 8:40:34 GMT -8 Robyn said:

What confuses me is why you accepted my older bugs

May 3, 2012 8:38:39 GMT -8 Ryan Roos said:

Bugs you were reporting were also broken in other browsers when we tested, usually Chrome or Firefox.

We test every bug reported before accepting it as a bug. None of us ever test in Comodo.

[VS Admin]

I haven't researched the browser itself -- all I can tell you is it's not supported. Every minute we spend researching an obscure new browser is a minute we can spend pushing development forward for everyone else. Please test using browsers that we officially support

[Martyn Dale]

Just to clarify here, there is a difference between what we "officially support" and what actually works. We are by no means saying you cannot use other browsers, or that they wont work. The issue is simply that other distributions can introduce unintended oddities. Its highly unlikely, but still possible.

When we test for bugs we test to make sure that all of the officially supported browsers work. Even YouTube and the likes only has a primary set of supported browsers in the same way. You would be surprised just how much time compatibility testing takes. Even with the current set of supported browsers, a large amount of dev time goes into just making sure the current list works

From a developmental standpoint, bugs you find in Chrome, are bugs we need to fix, but bugs in a derivative might just be a bug the derivative itself. Those issues are between the derivatives customers, and itself to resolve.

Its better to leave out that extra possibility (however unlikely it might be) that a bug you are seeing here is actually not even our fault. That is the reasoning behind officially supported software/hardware lists that companies provide.

[Robyn]

May 3, 2012 8:46:27 GMT -8 Ryan Roos said:

May 3, 2012 8:40:34 GMT -8 Robyn said:

What confuses me is why you accepted my older bugs

May 3, 2012 8:38:39 GMT -8 Ryan Roos said:

Bugs you were reporting were also broken in other browsers when we tested, usually Chrome or Firefox.

We test every bug reported before accepting it as a bug. None of us ever test in Comodo.

I get it, okay!

May 3, 2012 8:46:31 GMT -8 VS Admin said:

I haven't researched the browser itself -- all I can tell you is it's not supported. Every minute we spend researching an obscure new browser is a minute we can spend pushing development forward for everyone else. Please test using browsers that we officially support

True, that.

May 3, 2012 9:11:43 GMT -8 Martyn Dale said:

Just to clarify here, there is a difference between what we "officially support" and what actually works. We are by no means saying you cannot use other browsers, or that they wont work. The issue is simply that other distributions can introduce unintended oddities. Its highly unlikely, but still possible.

When we test for bugs we test to make sure that all of the officially supported browsers work. Even YouTube and the likes only has a primary set of supported browsers in the same way. You would be surprised just how much time compatibility testing takes. Even with the current set of supported browsers, a large amount of dev time goes into just making sure the current list works

From a developmental standpoint, bugs you find in Chrome, are bugs we need to fix, but bugs in a derivative might just be a bug the derivative itself. Those issues are between the derivatives customers, and itself to resolve.

Its better to leave out that extra possibility (however unlikely it might be) that a bug you are seeing here is actually not even our fault. That is the reasoning behind officially supported software/hardware lists that companies provide.

I understand. So Dragon happens to be different enough that you just don't want to risk it and waste time testing.

What versions of Firefox do you support?

So you support IE7, 8 9
Firefox ?
Chrome ?
Safari 4
Opera 11?

[Shrike]

May 3, 2012 8:38:39 GMT -8 Ryan Roos said:

Bugs you were reporting were also broken in other browsers when we tested, usually Chrome or Firefox.

It's not a coincidence.

Chrome and Comodo Dragon (and, in fact, all Chromium-based browsers) use the same layout engine: Webkit. This is what is used to render and process the pages, the differences between these browsers are in the other parts of the browser (and the versions of Webkit used may be slightly more/less out-of-date).

Please, do actually test such bugs in Chrome as well just to be safe, because I really wouldn't be surprised if Chrome has them as well.

[Robyn]

May 3, 2012 17:24:27 GMT -8 Shrike said:

May 3, 2012 8:38:39 GMT -8 Ryan Roos said:

Bugs you were reporting were also broken in other browsers when we tested, usually Chrome or Firefox.

It's not a coincidence.

Chrome and Comodo Dragon (and, in fact, all Chromium-based browsers) use the same layout engine: Webkit. This is what is used to render and process the pages, the differences between these browsers are in the other parts of the browser (and the versions of Webkit used may be slightly more/less out-of-date).

Please, do actually test such bugs in Chrome as well just to be safe, because I really wouldn't be surprised if Chrome has them as well.

That's sort of what i was saying, I just didn't have the technical know how.

[Ryan Roos]

May 6, 2012 5:47:18 GMT -8 Robyn said:

May 3, 2012 17:24:27 GMT -8 Shrike said:

It's not a coincidence.

Chrome and Comodo Dragon (and, in fact, all Chromium-based browsers) use the same layout engine: Webkit. This is what is used to render and process the pages, the differences between these browsers are in the other parts of the browser (and the versions of Webkit used may be slightly more/less out-of-date).

Please, do actually test such bugs in Chrome as well just to be safe, because I really wouldn't be surprised if Chrome has them as well.

That's sort of what i was saying, I just didn't have the technical know how.

Which is why we explained to you that we support Chrome and not Chromium extensions. Martyn did a very good job of explaining that. And I explained that we test every bug you report but we only test in our supported browsers. So when you say you're using a Chromium extension (Comodo) I test in Chrome. That determines if its an actual ProBoards bug, or just a Comodo bug. They are very similar but they are not the same. If they were the same then they wouldn't both exist. Clearly Comodo is doing some things different in an attempt at more privacy. They both use webkit, but that doesn't make them infallible.

[Robyn]

May 6, 2012 12:21:44 GMT -8 Ryan Roos said:

May 6, 2012 5:47:18 GMT -8 Robyn said:

That's sort of what i was saying, I just didn't have the technical know how.

Which is why we explained to you that we support Chrome and not Chromium extensions. Martyn did a very good job of explaining that. And I explained that we test every bug you report but we only test in our supported browsers. So when you say you're using a Chromium extension (Comodo) I test in Chrome. That determines if its an actual ProBoards bug, or just a Comodo bug. They are very similar but they are not the same. If they were the same then they wouldn't both exist. Clearly Comodo is doing some things different in an attempt at more privacy. They both use webkit, but that doesn't make them infallible.

Okay, cool.