Safari 3.0 browser and Sugar... minor bug

[al3]

I use an Intel Mac OS X ( 10.4.11). Sugar is on my dedicated remote server running on FreeBSD, Apache 2.x, PHP 5.x, and MySQL 5.x.

The new Safari 3.0 browser works well with Sugar (the previous version did not.)

There is only one bug I found.... the date-picker icons. They work on most of the screens but not on the account screen. When you go to "Schedule a Call" you get the 'short form' and the date-picker icon will not work. But if you click "show full form" it works there. Very strange.

Is there a place to report this to the engineers as it may be an easy fix.

Outside of that, everything else works with the new Safari TTBOMK.

Al

[Angel]

You can always submit bugs online at http://bugs.sugarcrm.com

However, you should also be aware that Safari is not officially supported. So don't be surprised if it isn't considered a "bug" given you are using it in an environment for which it is not designed and/or don't expect to see a "fix" anytime soon.

[al3]

I understand that Safari is not a supported browser (not sure why). I can use FF if I wish... but the fact that the date picker works on other screens and not on the account screen leads me to think that this might be an easy fix that the developers might want to do... because I believe they could then say that Sugar IS supported on Safari. It all works well for me so far (after about 2 weeks of pounding on it.)

I'll submit the bug.

Thanks,

Al

[Angel]

but the fact that the date picker works on other screens and not on the account screen leads me to think that this might be an easy fix that the developers might want to do... because I believe they could then say that Sugar IS supported on Safari. It all works well for me so far (after about 2 weeks of pounding on it.)

I get what you are saying, but I respectfully disagree. One user's experience cannot replace a full QA cycle and conversely, a full QA cycle cannot account for every variation in how the community at large will use the software.

Personally, I wouldn't like to see them say it is supported without it being thoroughly tested by both the user community and Sugar. Otherwise, this only leads to bad press/perception of the software.

Just my 2 cents...

[al3]

Personally, I wouldn't like to see them say it is supported without it being thoroughly tested by both the user community and Sugar. Otherwise, this only leads to bad press/perception of the software.

Just my 2 cents...

I agree. I think they could have 3 levels of adjudication:

Fully supported and well tested (IE, Firefox)
Seems to Work But Take Your Chance (Safari, Opera)
No Idea.. and Good Luck! (Camino, and others)

Not a big deal. I was using FF just for Sugar and Safari for everything else until 3.0 came out two weeks ago and I was happy to learn that everything worked except this date thing (and not a big deal as I can key-enter the date of the phone call.) Safari 3.0 is blazingly fast on the Mac. They really "mated" it to the OS.

Al

[Angel]

I agree. I think they could have 3 levels of adjudication:

Fully supported and well tested (IE, Firefox)
Seems to Work But Take Your Chance (Safari, Opera)
No Idea.. and Good Luck! (Camino, and others)

LOL, exactly. I especially like the last one.

In my previous life, I was friends with "It is not designed for that environment, but we are aware of a number of users successfully using it in that type of configuration."