Personally, I just find the new method inconvenient in almost every aspect. It feels like, intentional or not, that FireBug is rewritten from scratch every time a new version comes out because features are drastically changed between versions as opposed to bugs being fixed and new features added.
I wasn't a fan of the activation model in 1.3 but I grew into it over time. The current activation model takes that one step further than the 1.3 model away from the 1.2 model. In 1.2, I appreciated being able to have Firebug always on and disable it on specific sites. I like to have it available all the time in case I want to use it, none of this refreshing the page repeatedly to get what I want. This is my preferred activation model. In 1.3, my typical use-case was simply to whitelist any domains I was going to use it on often as soon as I went to them. This way I never had to wonder if, for example, Firebug was running on ANY of my development sites (all on the same domain). With only slight modifications, this activation model could have easily been made to work like 1.2 for users who were interested. After one moment of annoyance, I could have all of my sites functioning with Firebug with NO ACTION from me. In 1.4, while the functionality makes sense, I have to go through a lot of steps (AND avoid clicking the X........) to get Firebug up on a site, and it seems file or folder based or something. On first run, I have to: *) Right click Firebug icon *) Enable all panels *) Click to open Firebug *) Refresh the page *) Check things *) Minimize Firebug (don't click the X or you have to start all over!) *) Come back to the page at some later time and again avoid clicking the X during use, which disables Firebug and messes up the domain setting again. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Previously, You go to your domain, click to open firebug, check all the boxes and the button and you never have to worry about messing that setting up again unless you do it intentionally. In my opinion, all of this could be avoided by having two modes for Firebug, whitelist mode and blacklist mode. In whitelist mode, Firebug is always disabled and you can enable it for specific domains. In blacklist mode it is always enabled and you can disable it for specific domains. There is no worrying about the bug icon, clicking the wrong buttons, or anything and setup can default to whichever makes most sense. I'm positive that eventually I'll have just rolled the new activation model in to my workflow, it's just annoying to have to do so when the old model worked just fine for me. I used many of the 1.4 alphas and saw complaints about the new activation model come in all the time, but they are always passed off as either the activation model having bugs or the user just using it wrong. I don't recall anyone complaining this much about the model in 1.3, because, whether you preferred it or not, it was intuitive and easy. The new model, so far, just isn't (or, especially, isn't as intuitive as the old model). On Jul 1, 12:14 am, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 30, 9:30 pm, MorningZ <[email protected]> wrote: > ... > > > I'm in Visual Studio, i built my project, and choose the file to view > > in browser > > >http://i40.tinypic.com/2cpx8uo.jpg > > Ok right away I see your problem. Does Visual Studio generates as a > new file name every time? And it's not a web site so you don't even > have a domain correct? > > > > > So Flock (version 2.5) opens up, Firebug (i'm on 1.4.0b3) comes up > > disabled..... > > >http://i42.tinypic.com/30mokmp.jpg(andyeah, that is the annoying > > part) > > Just to help the communications, we would not call that "up disabled". > Rather we would say "closed" (because you have no UI) and "suspended" > because the icon is gray. > > > > > So now i have to click the bug to "activate", which also opens the > > panel, which i am running 3 monitors but not very high resolution so i > > can't actually read/use what i am working on because the panel is > > hogging up the viewport > > >http://i43.tinypic.com/27yvpnb.jpg > > If you had ever done this in the past for that URL, Firebug would > already be active. > > > > > So now I have to make another click to "undock", and then drag it to > > another monitor it just so i can read/use the web page > > >http://i44.tinypic.com/2885b9j.jpg > > I like "undock" but we call it "detach". If you had been detached > before, you would stay detached. > > > > > Sure, that simple example may sound like "well, it's just a few > > clicks", but as a professional developer, I am having to do that a lot > > of times over and over and over on a given 12 hour workday...... and i > > am closing and opening windows all the time (as that first screenshot > > causes a new page/tab to open) > > I do not consider this sequence you describe to be trivial. (Sounds a > lot like what I have to do to develop Firebug tho ;-). > > > You all are totally hung up that this new "activation" mode is the way > > to go.... > > From what I can see in your information so far, the issue here is that > Visual Studio is generating file names. If so, then the domain-name > white/black list thing has nothing to do with this since you don't > even have a domain name. > > I'm not hung up on the new activation model. Rather I think it's a > great solution for the vast majority of users. But Firebug is used by > lots and lots of people in lots and lots of ways. So it's not possible > to anticipate all the cases. As a practical matter, I am personally > not going to re-work the activation model. I am willing to make > adjustments and to help extension developers. But first let's really > understand what is going on in your case. > > jjb --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
