4 ms·

Two year old bug in Android

7 points by abava 14y ago

revelation 14y ago
That is a feature request, not a bug.
- anonymfus 14y ago
  Missing features and don't working features are equal in user's eyes.
  - buster 14y ago
    That doesn't change the definition of "bug", though.
    - anonymfus 14y ago
      Definition from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug ): >A software bug is an error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault in a computer program or system that produces an incorrect or unexpected result, or causes it to behave in unintended ways. So lack of support for common standard is unexpected and reason for it could be flaw or mistake. Also http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/bug_3 http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/bug_3 > a mistake or problem in a computer program http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bug?s=t http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bug?s=t >a defect or imperfection, as in a mechanical device, computer program, or plan; glitch Imperfection!
      - buster 14y ago
        Geez.. you deliberately take some words of an article and totally ignore the primary defining words in your own pasted text which is "error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault". Also, it is absuletely not unexpected or an incorrect result when it's not even implemented. It's intended by the programmer not to work and it's your own wish that it should work. It's definitely not a fault in the program code that it doesn't cope with the URI. It was never intended to do that. It would be a bug if there is code for that URI scheme and the browser/OS should handle that, but doesn't. So if you can point me to the code in Android or some other hint that the scheme should work, i'll agree with you and call it a bug :) Rest assured that arguing that a bug and a feature request are the same thing will not help on HackerNews. You can try that elsewhere :)
hxseven 14y ago
Is it really so bad that this SMS URI scheme wasn't implemented? To me it looks like another potential security vulnerability that could be abused by malicious websites. Therefore I'm quite happy that this "feature" is missing ;)
- abava 14y ago
  It does not send SMS automatically. Just open SMS client
  - hxseven 14y ago
    Yes, I know. If they implement it properly it's alright. But my concern is that a it might get a security vulnerability when a nifty hacker finds a way to automatically submit the SMS. And in my opinion omitting the feature is the best way to avoid that problem.
buster 14y ago
Bug or not, there are far more important things to work on then this (like IMAP Idle support in the standard client).
fomojola 14y ago
There's an argument that this COULD be a platform feature, but it would be fairly simple to write an Android app that provides an IntentHandler for the SMS scheme. I'd never actually come across that particular URL scheme used anywhere: iOS/Apple clearly have it though.
smcguinness 14y ago
Here is another 2 yr old bug that I just ran into this week. http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=14924 http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=14924
- buster 14y ago
  Here you have a 4 year old "bug" aka enhancement: https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1030&can=1&q=IMAP%20IDLE&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Owner%20Summary%20Stars%20Opened https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1030&...
superxor 14y ago
If Android team doesn't see this as a potential feature, they should at the least close the bug, just letting it rot does not align with the goal of having a bug tracker.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
toigo 14y ago
This alligator seems a little closer to the boat, why don't we take care of it first? HTTP Authentication http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1353 http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1353

7 points by abava 14y ago

revelation 14y ago

That is a feature request, not a bug.

anonymfus 14y ago
Missing features and don't working features are equal in user's eyes.
- buster 14y ago
  That doesn't change the definition of "bug", though.
  - anonymfus 14y ago
    Definition from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug ): >A software bug is an error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault in a computer program or system that produces an incorrect or unexpected result, or causes it to behave in unintended ways. So lack of support for common standard is unexpected and reason for it could be flaw or mistake. Also http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/bug_3 http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/bug_3 > a mistake or problem in a computer program http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bug?s=t http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bug?s=t >a defect or imperfection, as in a mechanical device, computer program, or plan; glitch Imperfection!
    - buster 14y ago
      Geez.. you deliberately take some words of an article and totally ignore the primary defining words in your own pasted text which is "error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault". Also, it is absuletely not unexpected or an incorrect result when it's not even implemented. It's intended by the programmer not to work and it's your own wish that it should work. It's definitely not a fault in the program code that it doesn't cope with the URI. It was never intended to do that. It would be a bug if there is code for that URI scheme and the browser/OS should handle that, but doesn't. So if you can point me to the code in Android or some other hint that the scheme should work, i'll agree with you and call it a bug :) Rest assured that arguing that a bug and a feature request are the same thing will not help on HackerNews. You can try that elsewhere :)

hxseven 14y ago

Is it really so bad that this SMS URI scheme wasn't implemented? To me it looks like another potential security vulnerability that could be abused by malicious websites. Therefore I'm quite happy that this "feature" is missing ;)

abava 14y ago
It does not send SMS automatically. Just open SMS client
- hxseven 14y ago
  Yes, I know. If they implement it properly it's alright. But my concern is that a it might get a security vulnerability when a nifty hacker finds a way to automatically submit the SMS. And in my opinion omitting the feature is the best way to avoid that problem.

buster 14y ago

Bug or not, there are far more important things to work on then this (like IMAP Idle support in the standard client).

fomojola 14y ago

There's an argument that this COULD be a platform feature, but it would be fairly simple to write an Android app that provides an IntentHandler for the SMS scheme. I'd never actually come across that particular URL scheme used anywhere: iOS/Apple clearly have it though.

smcguinness 14y ago

Here is another 2 yr old bug that I just ran into this week. http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=14924 http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=14924

buster 14y ago
Here you have a 4 year old "bug" aka enhancement: https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1030&can=1&q=IMAP%20IDLE&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Owner%20Summary%20Stars%20Opened https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1030&...

superxor 14y ago

If Android team doesn't see this as a potential feature, they should at the least close the bug, just letting it rot does not align with the goal of having a bug tracker.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

toigo 14y ago

This alligator seems a little closer to the boat, why don't we take care of it first? HTTP Authentication http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1353 http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1353