On 1/24/19 11:25 PM, Paolo Amadini wrote: > On 1/24/2019 9:57 PM, Philipp Kewisch wrote: >> was there a specific reason to put the code in chrome://browser/ ? It >> seems to me that this is a feature that is common for all toolkit apps, >> so if you put it in chrome://toolkit/ then Thunderbird can just make use >> of it without any major migration needs. > > We placed this page in the "browser" folder on purpose to get access to > a broader range of styling assets, like the icon we display for locked > preferences, without having to worry about uplifting specific parts of > Photon to the "toolkit" folder, which complicates the asset management. > > As we see it, this page is specific to Firefox Desktop. Other products > that live in mozilla-central already have a separate implementation, > which is much easier from a maintenance perspective anyways, given that > there are only about 400 lines of code and this way we don't have to > worry about extra communication overhead for every change. > > For the same reasons, while I can't speak for the Thunderbird project, > I believe that a separate code base for this page could lessen the > maintenance burden on Thunderbird as well. > > Cheers, > Paolo
For the old about:config, I don't recall many situations where we needed to make any adjustments in Thunderbird. While I understand the extra hassle of identifying styling assets that may need to be moved into toolkit, I think that toolkit should retain a reference implementation of about:config for desktop applications. I don't believe that extra communication overhead should be an issue. While Thunderbird enjoys a heads up if there are major changes, we are quite used to features breaking without prior notice. I'm not expecting any major changes to the new about:config that would require communication, as long as a the boundary between toolkit and browser is kept. Speaking for the Thunderbird project after conferring with our engineering manager, a separate code base for such an integral feature of toolkit would not lessen the maintenance burden. We would essentially need to port all the changes Firefox is making to the new about:config as we go along, which will be more work than the occasional bugfix on our end or patch contributed to m-c. I'd enjoy if you could reconsider, and if there is something we can do to help with that I am sure we can arrange something. If you are not convinced, maybe we can have a quick chat about this on IRC or a meeting. Thanks, Philipp _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
