Bugzilla

### Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
* **User impact if declined**: on macOS, TEXTAREA and other "monospace" text uses non-Japanese font "PingFang SC Regular" on Japanese website, while it should be "Osaka-Mono".
comment #24 has more context.

The fix isn't covered by automated tests, because Osaka-Mono isn't available on automation.
Testcase itself is included in the patch, with disabled, and I've confirmed the fix locally with them.
* **Is this code covered by automated tests?**: No
* **Has the fix been verified in Nightly?**: No
* **Needs manual test from QE?**: Yes
* **If yes, steps to reproduce**: Run Nightly, open https://bug1697666.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=9208267 , make sure Osaka-Mono is used for textarea in default section, and text/textarea in monospace section
* **List of other uplifts needed**: None
* **Risk to taking this patch**: Low
* **Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky)**: Essentially, this reverts bug 1621248 change, with proper fix, so the behavior is reverted to before the patch, that had been there for long time.
* **String changes made/needed**: None

### Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
* **User impact if declined**: on macOS, TEXTAREA and other "monospace" text uses non-Japanese font "PingFang SC Regular" on Japanese website, while it should be "Osaka-Mono".
comment #24 has more context.

The fix isn't covered by automated tests, because Osaka-Mono isn't available on automation.
Testcase itself is included in the patch, with disabled, and I've confirmed the fix locally with them.
* **Is this code covered by automated tests?**: No
* **Has the fix been verified in Nightly?**: No
* **Needs manual test from QE?**: Yes
* **If yes, steps to reproduce**: Run Nightly, open https://bug1697666.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=9208267 , make sure Osaka-Mono is used for textarea in default section, and text/textarea in monospace section  (make sure Osaka-Mono font is enabled in Font Book.app)
* **List of other uplifts needed**: None
* **Risk to taking this patch**: Low
* **Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky)**: Essentially, this reverts bug 1621248 change, with proper fix, so the behavior is reverted to before the patch, that had been there for long time.
* **String changes made/needed**: None