Closed
Bug 652306
Opened 13 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
About dialog css shouldn't depend on MOZ_OFFICIAL_BRANDING
Categories
(Firefox :: General, defect)
Firefox
General
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
Firefox 6
People
(Reporter: glandium, Assigned: glandium)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 1 obsolete file)
9.29 KB,
patch
|
glandium
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The new about dialog for Nightly and Aurora has significant differences with the about dialog for Firefox. Bug 648362 made the main changes for this, and to do so added some ifdef MOZ_OFFICIAL_BRANDING in aboutDialog.css. While this works well for Firefox, it doesn't work well for rebranding. Rebranded builds (obviously) don't set MOZ_OFFICIAL_BRANDING, yet, as they most likely inherit from the previous Firefox branding, they do use a logo image and not a background image, and have a clear background instead of dark. I think aboutDialog.css should be split in a generic and a branding part.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•13 years ago
|
||
Something like that (untested) could work. It would even allow brandings to override some more css and do some fancy stuff if they wanted to.
Assignee: nobody → mh+mozilla
Attachment #527919 -
Flags: review?(gavin.sharp)
Comment 2•13 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 527919 [details] [diff] [review] Proposal >diff --git a/browser/branding/official/content/jar.mn b/browser/branding/official/content/jar.mn >+ content/branding/aboutDialog.css (aboutDialog.css) >+ content/branding/aboutDialog.css (aboutDialog.css) Once is enough :) Out of curiousity, how does branding for your builds work? Do you edit one of the existing branding directories in-place, or create your own? I'm mainly curious to know how you would typically notice a new requirement introduced on branding packages.
Attachment #527919 -
Flags: review?(gavin.sharp) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #2) > Comment on attachment 527919 [details] [diff] [review] > Proposal > > >diff --git a/browser/branding/official/content/jar.mn b/browser/branding/official/content/jar.mn > > >+ content/branding/aboutDialog.css (aboutDialog.css) > >+ content/branding/aboutDialog.css (aboutDialog.css) > > Once is enough :) D'oh. > Out of curiousity, how does branding for your builds work? Do you edit one of > the existing branding directories in-place, or create your own? I'm mainly > curious to know how you would typically notice a new requirement introduced on > branding packages. I have my own branding directory, which imports document.png from the unofficial branding, and I have a script that compares the things installed from the unofficial branding with what I install from mine to see if there are files I miss. That was until the unofficial branding changed, now I'm switching to compare with the official branding. I wanted to add something to check for missing dtd entities and stuff like that but I haven't come to this yet.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•13 years ago
|
||
Updated. I will test before landing.
Attachment #527919 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #527922 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•13 years ago
|
||
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/c5e8cc100248
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 6
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•13 years ago
|
||
I don't think there's anything verifiable here, since this doesn't change anything on mozilla builds.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•