Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 12/5/19 6:51 AM, smurf4234332342342342342...@gmail.com wrote: This re-introduced setting doesn't seem to exist It's there in about:config... are you not seeing it there? -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org

Re: Changes to tab min-width

I am aware of browser.tabs.tabMinWidth but it seems to have a minimum of 40 or 50. Setting it lower has no affect. This was the point of my message. I would like to set it to 10 or 15 or even 0 for infinite shrinking. Wade > On November 18, 2017 at 1:22 AM Dirkjan Ochtman

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 11:18:14 PM UTC+2, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 10/3/17 4:36 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > > 2. it sets the default value of the tab to 50, previously this value > > was hard-coded at 100. > > Jeff, > > So just to make sure I understand the change (and this is a

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 7:38 AM, wrote: > 57 is unusable for me..I keep 35-50 tabs open at any given time and I used > Custom Tab Width legacy extension to prevent scrolling. I CANNOT stand > scrolling thru tabs. I don't need to read the tab- I KNOW where they are. > It

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 3:36:40 PM UTC-5, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > Hi! > > tl;dr we changed the default pixel value at which we overflow tabs, > and I want your feedback. > > We just added a change to m-c[1] that does to things: > > 1. it reintroduces an old preference

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 10/10/17 1:11 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: This is highly dependent on screen size. It's dependent on window size. And I was just pointing out that the post I was replying to assumes that "12 or fewer tabs" means "not scrolling", whereas we have no obvious data to that effect. That is, we

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Oct 6, 2017 07:50, "Boris Zbarsky" wrote: On 10/6/17 9:52 AM, Nicolas B. Pierron wrote: > I will add that 91% of the session on release have 12 or fewer tabs, and > thus would not be concerned at all by these changes. > Do we actually know that? As I said upthread, at the

Re: Changes to tab min-width

When I first saw tabs shrink in Firefox 58a I thought it's a nasty bug and I started reporting it to Bugzilla. I found this thread and I'm glad this negative behaviour is open to discussion. As soon as I read it's possible I have used 'browser.tabs.tabMinWidth' to 'fix' the change. I have

Re: Changes to tab min-width

If you introduced the setting, I think it would increase it up to 150px to be able to see more tab title. Particularly when I have a lot of tabs from the same site open, it could help. At this moment I have 45 tabs open in Firefox, and 25 in Firefox Developer edition. Tabs start scrolling

Re: Changes to tab min-width

In my opinion, the important thing is that this is not about disabling scrolling behaviour altogether. This will not affect users with <10 tabs, it will possibly help Chrome users with 10-20 tabs, and it will destroy both use cases for users with >20 tabs because the tabs will be unreadable AND

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 4:36:40 PM UTC-4, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > 1. do you prefer the existing behaviour or the new behaviour? > 2. if you prefer a value for this pref different than 50 or 100, what > is it? Why? 1. Prefer old behavior, but can understand the desire for the new behavior

Re: Changes to tab min-width

>> I find (perhaps because I'm a mozilla user, and a tab-hoarder) that >> Chrome's UI is DREADFUL for anyone with lots of tabs - and probably >> intentionally to push users into closing them, since large numbers of >> tabs simply doesn't work as well in Chrome as in Firefox. So mimicing >> their

Re: Changes to tab min-width

> I don't know about you, but a common case for me is go-to-news-site, > open-N-articles-in-tabs, read-articles (maybe ;-) ). Probably learned > that in the days of less bandwidth; stuff can pull down in the > background. Saves a lot of go-back, > wait-for-page-to-load/render/scroll/etc. > >

Re: Changes to tab min-width

Hi, just a (power?) user input here, my subjective POV. In fact I was a little frightened when that min-width changed in Nightly. I liked very much the old behaviour, to see only a fraction of opened tabs (I'm nearly always in the overflow territory anyway), disliked Chrome for that

Re: Changes to tab min-width

I tend to keep a rather huge collection of tabs open at any one time (ranging from hundreds to well over a thousand). I found the 50px length to be unusable small. It was possible to determine which sites were open from their favicon but it was impossible to tell what page that was without

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: > There's "publish an extension that > ​ ​ > lets you fiddle the width" (doable today). ​WebExtensions can't manipulate prefs other than the ones explicitly exposed via a WebExtension API. Only "system add-ons" have

Re: Changes to tab min-width

>On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Lars Hansen wrote: > >> even if I don't exactly remember the ID I'm looking for I can narrow >> it down to one or two tabs and then hover if I need to. >> >> Many other sites also have tabs that can be distinguished >> from the first few

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Lars Hansen wrote: > even if I don't exactly remember the > ​ ​ > ID I'm looking for I can narrow it down to one or two tabs and then hover > ​ ​ > if I need to. > ​ ​ > Many other sites also have tabs that can be distinguished > ​ ​ > from

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 06/10/2017 17:05, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 10/3/17 5:18 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: So just to make sure I understand the change (and this is a theoretical point, because I haven't had a chance to try the change yet)... OK, now I have had a chance to try it. When set to the new 50px

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 10/3/17 5:18 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: So just to make sure I understand the change (and this is a theoretical point, because I haven't had a chance to try the change yet)... OK, now I have had a chance to try it. When set to the new 50px default, I see 1 letter of title or less (less,

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 10/6/17 9:52 AM, Nicolas B. Pierron wrote: I will add that 91% of the session on release have 12 or fewer tabs, and thus would not be concerned at all by these changes. Do we actually know that? As I said upthread, at the 100px tab width my tabs start to scroll when adding the 9th tab.

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 10/05/2017 01:34 PM, Chris Hutten-Czapski wrote: I prefer the old behaviour, but I don't have a strong opinion on the matter. I think it's because I'm used to tab navigation by keyboard shortcut more than by mouse. I rearrange tabs so that they're close together. For everyone curious about

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:33 PM, Brendan Barnwell > wrote: > ... > > > The difference between 12 and 24 tabs is meaningless. My usage > of > > Firefox involves large numbers of tabs,

Re: Changes to tab min-width

Maybe if you use browser.tabs.tabMinWidth = 80 instead, it can make it work better than 75 because, with 75, it still loses some extra information. On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 10/04/2017 12:43 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > >> Om my system (

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 03-10-17 22:36, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > 2. if you prefer a value for this pref different than 50 or 100, what > is it? Why? 80 gives about 3.5 to 4.5 characters of context, which seems to be enough in most cases. 70 is definitely too tiny, 75 is on the edge (I could probably live with it). 80

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 05-10-17 22:46, Daniel Veditz wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >> Is it technically difficult to try the technique of starting with 50px, >> and switching to 100px as soon as 50px wouldn't fit anyway? > > > ​Shrinking until they

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 10/04/2017 12:43 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: Om my system ( retina macbook pro ) 70 is starting to look like a better compromise for tab readability. I think 70 is better than 50, but I noticed that if a foreground tab starts to play audio and we need to show the audio icon alongside the tab

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 4/10/2017 18:15, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > The feedback I am going to find actionable here is, which > setting value of this preference do you find most useful. Jeff, I've read through all the responses here, and I've seen several people point out the same problem I did: we're getting the worst

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 5/10/2017 19:35, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 10/5/17 1:05 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> [1] I'm sure users that have been conditioned that there exists only a >> single search engine are going to be confused by the choice that it >> offers. Maybe we should remove the search box and switch to

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 03-10-17 22:36, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > We did this based on some early feedback from a few different sources > that people coming from chrome That's rather ironic. I have always thought that one reason why Chrome uses these uselessly-tiny tabs is to *discourage* users from hoarding a lot of

Re: Changes to tab min-width

I prefer the old behaviour, but I don't have a strong opinion on the matter. I think it's because I'm used to tab navigation by keyboard shortcut more than by mouse. I rearrange tabs so that they're close together. For everyone curious about how much of an outlier your subsessions are... on

Re: Changes to tab min-width

+1 to 75px. All the points that I wanted to say about 50px being too small have already been said by now. On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 1:29 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Jeff Griffiths > wrote: > >> 1. do you prefer the

Re: Changes to tab min-width

Am 04.10.17 um 18:43 schrieb Jeff Griffiths: Om my system ( retina macbook pro ) 70 is starting to look like a better compromise for tab readability. How I have been testing this: - change the value to a specific number, say 70 - open enough tabs so that overflow triggers, then close

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > 1. do you prefer the existing behaviour or the new behaviour? > 2. if you prefer a value for this pref different than 50 or 100, what > is it? Why? > Like others, I really like ~75 pixels. This allows me to see the

Re: Changes to tab min-width

I like having this option back, as I know this was a feature that a lot of people liked in the past. (even though I'm personally ok with the 100px width) I've been trying to use the new default (50px) for a couple of hours, and it felt surprisingly unusable, in a way that I couldn't quite figure

Re: Changes to tab min-width

Am Mittwoch, 4. Oktober 2017 18:44:04 UTC+2 schrieb Jeff Griffiths: > Om my system ( retina macbook pro ) 70 is starting to look like a better > compromise for tab readability. > > How I have been testing this: > >- change the value to a specific number, say 70 >- open enough tabs so

Re: Changes to tab min-width

Am Dienstag, 3. Oktober 2017 22:36:40 UTC+2 schrieb Jeff Griffiths: > > 1. do you prefer the existing behaviour or the new behaviour? I don't mind being able to change the minimum-width for the tabs, actually I like that Firefox is as customizable as it is, but... > 2. if you prefer a value

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 10/3/17 10:36 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: 1. it reintroduces an old preference 'browser.tabs.tabMinWidth' that contains a pixel value that controls the minimum width of a tab. It's nice that there is a preference now! 1. do you prefer the existing behaviour or the new behaviour? The

Re: Changes to tab min-width

Om my system ( retina macbook pro ) 70 is starting to look like a better compromise for tab readability. How I have been testing this: - change the value to a specific number, say 70 - open enough tabs so that overflow triggers, then close two tabs, then open a tab ( we retain overflow

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > 1. do you prefer the existing behaviour or the new behaviour? > 2. if you prefer a value for this pref different than 50 or 100, what > is it? Why? I prefer being able to see a minimum part of the title, because I

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:33 PM, Brendan Barnwell wrote: ... > The difference between 12 and 24 tabs is meaningless. My usage of > Firefox involves large numbers of tabs, frequently exceeding 1000. This > use case is quite manageable with a combination of

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: > 1. do you prefer the existing behaviour or the new behaviour? Definitely the existing behavior in Firefox. > 2. if you prefer a value for this pref different than 50 or 100, what > is it? Why? It should be

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 2017-10-03 13:36, Jeff Griffiths wrote: Hi! tl;dr we changed the default pixel value at which we overflow tabs, and I want your feedback. We just added a change to m-c[1] that does to things: 1. it reintroduces an old preference 'browser.tabs.tabMinWidth' that contains a pixel value that

Re: Changes to tab min-width

+1 On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 15:00 Chris Peterson wrote: > On 2017-10-03 2:18 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > Right now, at 60px, I can see 7-10 chars in a tab title. This is > > sometimes (but not always) enough for me to make sense of what I'm > > looking at when the favicon

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 2017-10-03 2:18 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: Right now, at 60px, I can see 7-10 chars in a tab title.  This is sometimes (but not always) enough for me to make sense of what I'm looking at when the favicon is not helpful.  For example, for bugzilla bugs I can see the whole bug number. In the

Re: Changes to tab min-width

Jeff Griffiths wrote: 1. do you prefer the existing behaviour or the new behaviour? I prefer the new behavior. 2. if you prefer a value for this pref different than 50 or 100, what is it? Why? I prefer a value of 0 (i.e. truly infinite tabs, never scrolling), because I distinguish tabs by

Re: Changes to tab min-width

On 10/3/17 4:36 PM, Jeff Griffiths wrote: 2. it sets the default value of the tab to 50, previously this value was hard-coded at 100. Jeff, So just to make sure I understand the change (and this is a theoretical point, because I haven't had a chance to try the change yet)... Right now, the

Changes to tab min-width

Hi! tl;dr we changed the default pixel value at which we overflow tabs, and I want your feedback. We just added a change to m-c[1] that does to things: 1. it reintroduces an old preference 'browser.tabs.tabMinWidth' that contains a pixel value that controls the minimum width of a tab. 2. it