Maybe you can reuse the ones that Fennec has? They have rewritten some to be more mobile-friendly and are using the desktop versions for others, AFAIK.
kats On Nov 12, 2015 3:24 AM, "Frederik Braun" <[email protected]> wrote: > +1, > > I too think that we should allow accessing the Gecko about: pages built > into platform. They are usually not meant for the "average user", so I'd > suggest we can live with some being not "mobile optimized", while doing > this in a later iteration upstream. > > On 12.11.2015 06:06, Tim Guan-tin Chien wrote: > > (I was going to respond to another thread but this seems to be fit in > more) > > > > I don't think Firefox OS (specifically Gaia) should re-implement every > > about: page in Gecko. There is just too much work for the Firefox OS > > team to reproduce every about: page that is already done by the Platform > > team. > > > > Sure, we want to get them (1) localized in Gaia or maybe (2) > > customizable with new UI in Gaia System app, but I think (1) can be done > > by having the Gecko about: pages localizable by Gaia System language > > packages and (2) should not be a priority if we are all working at the > > same company and try to produce multiple products with consistency. > > > > Unless there are arguments on (1) is not doable or (2) is indeed a > > shared goal across the entire company (thus invalid bug 1217269 at least > > partly), we should try to achieve (1), make about: accessible in FxOS, > > and move neterror.xhtml back to Gecko. > > > > The work involved to re-create about: UIs in Gaia System / Gaia > > Settings, as evidenced by the previous thread, involves non-trivial API > > engineering and/or IAC hacking. I don't think it's a desired direction > > in terms of architecture or use of our human resource even though > > Fernando can keep the test coverage we are happy with. > > > > This needs a resolution. The conversation should have happened 3 years > ago. > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Naoki Hirata <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=886905 > > > > You are more than welcome to fix the pages so they work for Firefox > > OS. :) > > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Frederik Braun <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > There are many other useful about pages that do not currently > > work on > > Firefox OS (config, memory, crashes, webrtc, mozilla, robots, > > ... :)). > > > > Do we want them to work in the future? Either by just allowing > > them from > > the browser app or redirecting to a customized version from the > > system app. > > > > > > On 11.11.2015 07:05, Fabrice Desré wrote: > > > The only about: page we display is about:neterror. On b2g we > > redirect it > > > to a page served from the system app > > (apps/system/net_error.html). The > > > nice thing doing that is that we have control of its look & > > feel (even > > > if we started by mostly copying the one from Fennec), and we > can > > > localize it like the rest of gaia. That means th > > at we don't have to ship > > > a localized gecko, which is a win. We still have some > unlocalized > > > strings in gecko that we should provide from the system app > > though, like > > > the label on <input type=file> buttons. > > > > > > Fabrice > > > > > > On 11/10/2015 07:50 PM, Tim Guan-tin Chien wrote: > > >> Understood, thanks for the response Francisco, Fernando and > Ben! > > >> > > >> Maybe the bigger issue here is whether or not we should > > somehow allow > > >> about: URLs to be loaded into FxOS? I don't think it make > > sense for > > >> re-do every about: page UI in the FxOS org since Platform > > team already > > >> did it once? > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:46 AM, Francisco Jordano > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi there, > > >> > > >> as Ben mentioned there is a new effort from the devtools > > team to > > >> provide tools for debugging the new features that > > platform is building. > > >> > > >> IIRC, Eddy is working on the new tools under > > about:debugging that > > >> will be the umbrella for debugging addons, workers, > > serviceworkers, etc. > > >> > > >> We still don't have it available for FxOS, so IMO, we > > should keep > > >> the current implementation in Settings that provide basic > > >> functionality for developers, and remove that > > implementation as soon > > >> about:debugging is available for Firefox OS. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> F. > > >> > > >> On 10 November 2015 at 14:04, Ben Kelly > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:32 AM, Tim Guan-tin Chien > > >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > wrote: > > >> > > >> Somehow it was decided about:serviceworker in > > Settings app > > >> should be engineered with a chrome/content event > > to System > > >> app and an IAC channel to Settings app: > > >> > > >> > > > https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/blob/3180bbe2f2e94809c1fcef0e92a01da99cdfb530/apps/system/js/about_service_workers_proxy.js#L21-L29 > > >> > > >> When, per previous threads, we should just > > implement a > > >> ServiceWorkerManager API accessible from Settings > > app. > > >> > > >> > > >> Is it really necessary to have this panel in settings > > app vs > > >> providing the information via devtools? > > >> > > >> The main issue with the previous settings app service > > worker > > >> panel is that it could run the service worker script > > in the > > >> wrong content process. For example, when you click > > the update > > >> button it would launch the service worker script for > > appId X in > > >> the settings content process with appId Y. This > > would then > > >> cause security checks to fail and kill the content > > process. > > >> > > >> If necessary we can surface a small interface to > > settings app, > > >> but I would strongly suggest that it be limited in > > scope. We > > >> should not expose the full nsIServiceWorkerManager > > interface. > > >> It would also need to include IPC to the parent > > process to work > > >> properly. > > >> > > >> > > >> Unless there are counter-arguments unknown to me, > > I would > > >> like to organize work and do this conversion. > > >> > > >> > > >> We are planning to revisit our service worker e10s > > design for > > >> b2g at the December work week. I would recommend > > waiting to do > > >> any major changes until after that session. > > >> > > >> Ben > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> dev-fxos mailing list > > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] > > > > >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos > > >> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev-fxos mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev-fxos mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-fxos mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos >
_______________________________________________ dev-fxos mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos
