Closed
Bug 1303469
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
Implement a stub form autofill system extension
Categories
(Toolkit :: Form Manager, defect)
Toolkit
Form Manager
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla51
| Tracking | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| firefox51 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: MattN, Assigned: MattN)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
(Whiteboard: [form autofill:M0])
Attachments
(2 files)
In order to make it easier to parallelize initial development of the form autofill feature during the kickoff work week next week, we should land a stub system extension for everyone to build off of.
| Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
| Comment hidden (mozreview-request) |
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
| mozreview-review | ||
Comment on attachment 8792161 [details]
Bug 1303469 - Stub form autofill system extension.
https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/79374/#review77908
It's a bit annoying having to copy/paste so much, thanks for slogging through that! Standard8 is putting together a good stub template to use which will help next time.
I'll file a bug to fix the comments I made here - we should reduce the delta between the various extensions wherever possible.
::: browser/extensions/formautofill/bootstrap.js:5
(Diff revision 1)
> -/* -*- indent-tabs-mode: nil; js-indent-level: 2 -*- */
> /* This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public
> * License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this
> * file, You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */
>
> -// for now we ship a stub, that can be upgraded as-needed after release
> +"use strict";
We should fix this in the `webcompat` copy too.
::: browser/extensions/formautofill/install.rdf.in:18
(Diff revision 1)
> <em:version>1.0</em:version>
> <em:type>2</em:type>
> <em:bootstrap>true</em:bootstrap>
> <em:multiprocessCompatible>true</em:multiprocessCompatible>
>
> - <!-- Target Application this theme can install into,
> + <!-- Target Application this extension can install into,
Ditto
::: browser/extensions/formautofill/test/browser/browser_check_installed.js:7
(Diff revision 1)
> -// make sure that the stub is present and enabled
> +add_task(function* test_enabled() {
> -add_task(function* stub_enabled() {
> let addon = yield new Promise(
> - resolve => AddonManager.getAddonByID("webcompat@mozilla.org", resolve)
> + resolve => AddonManager.getAddonByID("formautofill@mozilla.org", resolve)
> );
> - isnot(addon, null, "Webcompat stub addon should exist");
> + isnot(addon, null, "Check addon exists");
Removing the redundant add-on name is a good idea.
Attachment #8792161 -
Flags: review?(rhelmer) → review+
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
| mozreview-review | ||
Comment on attachment 8792162 [details]
Bug 1303469 - Initial formautofill .eslintrc.
https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/79376/#review77910
lgtm, can take or leave my comment.
::: browser/extensions/formautofill/test/browser/.eslintrc:3
(Diff revision 1)
> +{
> + "extends": [
> + "../../../../../testing/mochitest/browser.eslintrc"
I assume you're doing this to get all the extra rules we're able to enable for newer code like WebExtensions, right? I wish we had a clearer way to express that's the intent rather than this far-off `extends`.
Maybe consider adding a comment?
We're probably a little ways off being able to enable this in `tookit/.eslintrc` but when we do this can be cleaned up so I don't think it's anything to stress over.
Attachment #8792162 -
Flags: review?(rhelmer) → review+
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Robert Helmer [:rhelmer] from comment #3)
> I'll file a bug to fix the comments I made here - we should reduce the delta
> between the various extensions wherever possible.
Bug 1303514
| Assignee | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
| mozreview-review-reply | ||
Comment on attachment 8792162 [details]
Bug 1303469 - Initial formautofill .eslintrc.
https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/79376/#review77910
> I assume you're doing this to get all the extra rules we're able to enable for newer code like WebExtensions, right? I wish we had a clearer way to express that's the intent rather than this far-off `extends`.
>
> Maybe consider adding a comment?
>
> We're probably a little ways off being able to enable this in `tookit/.eslintrc` but when we do this can be cleaned up so I don't think it's anything to stress over.
No, every directory for mochitest-browser-chrome tests has this "extends" and it sets up the environment for those test files e.g. head.js and browser.js scope, defines test functions, etc. See https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/testing/mochitest/browser.eslintrc
I think perhaps this comment was meant for the other .eslintrc file?
| Assignee | ||
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
| mozreview-review-reply | ||
Comment on attachment 8792161 [details]
Bug 1303469 - Stub form autofill system extension.
https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/79374/#review77908
It actually wasn't bad at all IMO :) I'm aware of Standard8's repo but it's setup more for a separate repo, not as much for an extension developed in m-c from what I saw.
> Ditto
Yeah, I actually did make this change in the commit as it seemed clear that it was wrong. I wasn't sure if the other changes would also be wantd for webcompat so was waiting to see what you would say.
> Removing the redundant add-on name is a good idea.
Thanks for the speedy reviews!
Pushed by mozilla@noorenberghe.ca:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/03f631f0fca7
Stub form autofill system extension. r=rhelmer
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/86b10c4dce3b
Initial formautofill .eslintrc. r=rhelmer
Comment 9•9 years ago
|
||
Backed out in https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/rev/9fcea68f98ef for unexpected file access in xperf, oddly only PGO not opt, https://treeherder.mozilla.org/logviewer.html#?job_id=3655070&repo=autoland
Comment 10•9 years ago
|
||
Pushed by mozilla@noorenberghe.ca:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/a01c29ae5295
Stub form autofill system extension. r=rhelmer
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/fd81de7deaab
Initial formautofill .eslintrc. r=rhelmer
| Assignee | ||
Comment 11•9 years ago
|
||
Relanded with https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/diff/a01c29ae5295/testing/talos/talos/xtalos/xperf_whitelist.json
Joel, I landed this with the change since it was trivial and the same as was done for flyweb and webcompat and I saw you didn't review the flyweb change. I was in a rush to re-land since I was hoping to have this directory landed so development can start during a form autofill work week this week. Let me know if you have any problems with that change.
Flags: needinfo?(jmaher)
Comment 12•9 years ago
|
||
| bugherder | ||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a01c29ae5295
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/fd81de7deaab
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
status-firefox51:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla51
:mattn, thanks for checking with me- that looks just fine!
Flags: needinfo?(jmaher)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•