Bug 1869400 Comment 10 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

(In reply to :Gijs (he/him) from comment #9)
> Yeah, this doesn't need to be S2 in terms of how it affects users. There may be non-default settings that do need to be S2, but given this has been broken for 2 years before someone found and filed a bug, and the fact that there's an easy workaround (copy paste the url into a new tab) means that it's probably not super high priority.
> 
> However, depending on what Peter/Andreas think this means for bfcache and where the root of the problem is, it may be worth fixing separately? I'm pretty confused as to why a page load would be able to have this effect at all, when normal navigation from the address bar or similar doesn't... I would feel better if we understood the issue a bit more.
> 

When we reviewed this in our team meeting, no one seemed to have a quick idea about what' up here...

> Bouncing needinfo for the latter.
(In reply to :Gijs (he/him) from comment #9)
> Yeah, this doesn't need to be S2 in terms of how it affects users. There may be non-default settings that do need to be S2, but given this has been broken for 2 years before someone found and filed a bug, and the fact that there's an easy workaround (copy paste the url into a new tab) means that it's probably not super high priority.
> 
> However, depending on what Peter/Andreas think this means for bfcache and where the root of the problem is, it may be worth fixing separately? I'm pretty confused as to why a page load would be able to have this effect at all, when normal navigation from the address bar or similar doesn't... I would feel better if we understood the issue a bit more.
> 

When we reviewed this in our team meeting, no one seemed to have a quick idea about what' up here...
Peter, sorry that I redirect the needinfo to you, if you have some theories or best guess, which may address Gijs' confusion.

> Bouncing needinfo for the latter.

Back to Bug 1869400 Comment 10