Open Bug 1564100 Opened 3 years ago Updated 11 months ago

Move One-Click Search Engines out of "Extensions" in about:support/Troubleshooting Information and create its own "One-Click Search Engines" group/category

Categories

(Firefox :: Search, enhancement, P3)

enhancement

Tracking

()

People

(Reporter: Virtual, Unassigned)

References

Details

(Keywords: nightly-community)

Move One-Click Search Engines out of "Extensions" in about:support/Troubleshooting Information and create its own "One-Click Search Engines" group/category.

As for now there is too much "spam" there in "Extensions" group/category and in Gecko/Firefox Profiler. What's more these extensions are not user extensions, they're internal Firefox extensions, same as "Nightly Features" (Firefox Monitor, Firefox Screenshots, Form Autofill, Web Compat, WebCompat Reporter).

Has Regression Range: --- → irrelevant
Has STR: --- → irrelevant

Bugbug thinks this bug is a task, but please change it back in case of error.

Type: defect → task
Priority: -- → P4

this is causing some confusion for users after the 68 update - they see these "extensions" in about:support which aren't surfaced anywhere else in the UI.

perhaps we could also just hide them from about:support like we're already doing in about:addons and about:debugging (after bug 1544372).

Type: defect → enhancement
See Also: → 1544372
Duplicate of this bug: 1564101

(In reply to [:philipp] from comment #2)

[...] perhaps we could also just hide them from about:support like we're already
doing in about:addons and about:debugging (after bug 1544372).

Hiding it in about:support will be bad idea, as this information is sometimes in some way kinda useful for debugging and troubleshooting, new section will be enough.
But I support hiding it in Firefox/Gecko Profiler, same like it's now with "Firefox/Nightly Features", as it's useless and not needed there.

I've been thinking about this a little. I think we should:

  • Filter-out the built-in extensions from the "Extensions" list.
  • Create a new section next to "Internationalisation & Localisation" for "Search" that includes:
    • The "browser.search.region" preference value.
    • A table of all search engines containing:
      • The search engine name
      • The load path
      • The search engine version
      • If the engine is hidden or not

Might also depend on bug 1569256 as we'll probably need the isBuiltIn flag.

Depends on: 1569256

Hello, I'd like to take this up. Let me know what exactly we have to do. Does this suffice?

*Filter-out the built-in extensions from the "Extensions" list.
*Create a new section next to "Internationalisation & Localisation" for "Search" that includes:
   - The "browser.search.region" preference value.
    - A table of all search engines containing:
           >The search engine name
           >The load path
           >The search engine version
           >If the engine is hidden or not

(In reply to Ruchika Gosain from comment #7)

Hello, I'd like to take this up. Let me know what exactly we have to do. Does this suffice?

Yes, that list is about right. If you look for aboutSupport.xhtml that'd be the good place to start looking. Note that the data is supplied by Troubleshoot.jsm. I suspect we might need Troubleshoot.jsm to supply some more data to the support page, and we might need to get that from the search service or add-on manager.

Assignee: nobody → ruchikag826
Mentor: standard8
OS: Windows 7 → All
Hardware: x86_64 → All

Hello, i came across this code in aboutSupport.xhtml. I would like to know what kind of output are we looking for exactly with Filter-out the built-in extensions from the "Extensions" list. Do we have to apply an if statement in here? Let me know, thanks.

<h2 class="major-section" data-l10n-id="extensions-title"/> <table> <thead> <tr> <th data-l10n-id="extensions-name"/> <th data-l10n-id="extensions-version"/> <th data-l10n-id="extensions-enabled"/> <th data-l10n-id="extensions-id"/> </tr> </thead> <tbody id="extensions-tbody"> </tbody> </table>

(In reply to Ruchika Gosain from comment #9)

Hello, i came across this code in aboutSupport.xhtml. I would like to know what kind of output are we looking for exactly with Filter-out the built-in extensions from the "Extensions" list. Do we have to apply an if statement in here? Let me know, thanks.

Not quite. If you look through to aboutSupport.js, you'll see there's a snapshotFormatters.extensions() function: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/5912f376ab6a17afcba2b7654586013158ed64b5/toolkit/content/aboutSupport.js#254-266

That's what is filling this in. If you backtrace that, or look up the file a bit, you'll see that the snapshotFormatters are getting their data from Troubleshoot:

https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/5912f376ab6a17afcba2b7654586013158ed64b5/toolkit/content/aboutSupport.js#32-36

That extension data is formulated here: https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/5912f376ab6a17afcba2b7654586013158ed64b5/toolkit/modules/Troubleshoot.jsm#265-294

If you look near the start of that function, you'll see a filter. I think if you debug that line (via the browser toolbox), or add a console log, then you should see that the extensions (e) have an isBuiltIn flag, which should hopefully be true for the search extensions.

I've also just found out, we need to check the extension manifest for the manifest.chrome_settings_overrides.search_provider section.

So in short, we'll want to change this filter to keep:

  • Extensions which are not flagged as isSystem (as is currently the case), and
  • Extensions which are not: flagged as isBuiltIn and have a search_provider section.

For the new section, we'll need to create a new dataset in Troubleshoot, e.g. search. As part of that search data, we will list only the extensions which have both isBuiltin set and have a search_provider section.

@ Ruchika Gosain - You were assigned to this bug by Mark Banner (:standard8) in 2019-08-08 in comment #8. Are you still want to work on this bug? If not, I will unassign you, so other person could be working on this.

Flags: needinfo?(ruchikag826)

Not heard from Ruchika recently, so unassigning. Dropping from mentored for now as I think this might need a little bit more work than expected.

Assignee: ruchikag826 → nobody
Mentor: standard8
Severity: normal → N/A
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Flags: needinfo?(ruchikag826)
Priority: P4 → P3
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.