Dictionnaire MySpell en Français (réforme 1990) addon not available/working for Firefox 3

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

()

Firefox
Extension Compatibility
RESOLVED FIXED
10 years ago
9 years ago

People

(Reporter: chris hofmann, Unassigned)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: eta:?, URL)

(Reporter)

Updated

10 years ago
Blocks: 364745
Summary: ictionnaire MySpell en Français (réforme 1990) addon not available/working for Firefox 3 → Dictionnaire MySpell en Français (réforme 1990) addon not available/working for Firefox 3

Comment 1

10 years ago
File a separate bug on the French localization?
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Mozilla%20Localizations
Maybe it needs only a simple maxversionnumber update of the add-on.

Comment 2

10 years ago
I'm pretty sure that the french localization already ships the new dictionary.

Maybe our french localizers can help with the add-on, though.

I'm not sure if there was a problem with dictionaries on amo needing distinct versions for fx2 and fx3, Wil?

Comment 3

10 years ago
Well, we don't really know what to do with the existing addons. They are for Firefox 2 and ship outdated MySpell dictionaries, while Firefox 3 will ship an integrated updated Hunspell dictionary (bug #408419). That's fine for people who download Firefox in French, but the others are left in the cold.

I think we should make a new extension for Firefox 3 with the new dictionary and somehow "retire" the Firefox 2 extensions (while leaving them available as long as Firefox 2 is supported), if that makes sense.

Comment 4

10 years ago
(In reply to comment #3)
> I think we should make a new extension for Firefox 3 with the new dictionary
> and somehow "retire" the Firefox 2 extensions (while leaving them available as
> long as Firefox 2 is supported), if that makes sense.

Everyone on board for this? Who would be the appropriate person to implement?

Whiteboard: eta:?
I was under the (false?) impression that Hunspell dictionaries were backwards compatible with MySpell.  Is that true?

We talked about this a little in the AMO meeting on Wednesday.  The dictionary page is getting a (much needed!) facelift with the 3.2 milestone (mockup: http://mozilla.focalcurve.com/categorylanding-languages.html).  We're thinking about putting in some kind of tabs at the top of the dictionary list for FF2 vs FF3 (and all other apps).

Comment 6

10 years ago
Wil, tabs would be helpful. For the French locale, we would need in fact *6* dictionaries: 3 for branch, 3 for trunk (classical, 1990 reform and combined dictionaries). The dictionary currently on AMO is an old one, with an other license.
We don't know currently how to package those, where to upload them and what will be happening for users using the old one.
We will provide the combined dictionary with 1.8.1.12 and trunk releases, respectively with MySpell and Hunspell format.
I think the German locale will have too to deal with several dictionaries due to spelling reform.
So, what should we do please?
That's a good question.  Can you explain more why 1 dictionary per version won't work?  It feels like a bad user experience if someone goes to the site and sees several versions of a locale to choose from and it's not really obvious why.

(I'm just trying to get a feel for how important different versions are and how many people will actually know the difference)

Comment 8

10 years ago
Well, one could say that only the combined dictionary is of interest for most of our users.

The two others are only for people with specific needs (e.g. teachers, govt. users, writers). We also don't know what to use as language code for those. For example, "fr-1990" seems invalid for AMO although it would best express what this dictionary is about (standard French as used everywhere, with the 1990 spelling). German locales work around that by specifying a country code (they already have up to 6 dictionaries on your page!), but it makes a lot less sense for French.

It would still be interesting to have all of them on AMO, maybe only listed as an alternative choice.
I'm rolling around an idea...  I'm thinking tabs for the application versions and then we flag a particular dictionary for a locale as the primary.  If additional dictionaries are available, they'll show up if the user clicks a plus sign or something next name of the locale.  I'll cook up a mockup or something, but that's my idea for now.

Comment 10

10 years ago
Shouldn't the bug description be updated to reflect this is a generic problem of all FF2 myspell plugins not working with FF3?
(In reply to comment #10)
> Shouldn't the bug description be updated to reflect this is a generic problem
> of all FF2 myspell plugins not working with FF3?
> 

Bug 423535 is covering the "adding application version tabs" part, so we should be good there.

Regarding comment #9, that patch has landed on preview but the add-ons aren't flagged correctly yet so it's still pretty ugly.
Depends on: 423535

Comment 12

10 years ago
I was thinking about non-[fr] reporters searching for bugs regarding their particular language not working between FF2 and FF3; the current description would indicate it's just an [fr] issue.  It took an out-of-band query (Stuart P.) to verify the bug existed as I would not have known where to start looking.

Perhaps: "FF2 myspell dictionaries not compatible with FF3 hunspell format"

What also threw Stuart off was the dict install web UI is still showing FF2 myspell install widgets despite the user agent change.  See: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browse/type:3 That page should present the hunspell resources for install.

Comment 13

10 years ago
To clarify, hunspell does work with myspell dictionaries.

myspell does not work with hunspell-specific ones.

Comment 14

10 years ago
We tested the live dictionary with Fx3, and it seems to work just fine. Can we bump the maxVer?

Comment 15

10 years ago
Indeed it will work fine; per comment #13, any MySpell dictionary will work with Hunspell.

But the point is that we now have a Hunspell dictionary which is way better though it will only work with Firefox 3. Since bug 423535 has been WONTFIXed, I suppose the way to go would be another extension and a special case on the language tools page.

Comment 16

10 years ago
Let's not jump to conclusions here just yet.
I've just uploaded new XPI with maxVersion at 3.0pre :)

Sorry for the delay, was busy :)

Comment 18

10 years ago
Alexandre -- could you bump this to 3.0.*? Remember, you do not need to re-upload if you're only changing the maxVer.

Comment 19

10 years ago
What will happen for Firefox 2 users if we do just that, and then upload the new dictionary ("awesomely" better, it's just it won't work with Firefox 2) with a minVer of 3.0.0? Will they get the "last known working update"?

Or will this move force us to keep the outdated dictionary even for Firefox 3 users as long as we want to support Firefox 2?
If a Firefox 3-only dictionary is uploaded to AMO (3.0 - 3.0.*), the update check script will always return that version regardless of the client's Firefox version. A Firefox 2 client shouldn't install the Firefox 3 version because it will still check the minVersion, but any Firefox 2 updates won't be offered.

Comment 21

10 years ago
OK, we should probably go with the maxVer bump then. And we would update the extension with the new dictionary some time after the Firefox 3 release... Alexandre?
I think the question now is will there need to be an update to the Firefox 2 dictionary in the near future?  If not, uploading the new dictionary and marking it compatible with 3.0 - 3.0.* will work.

From comment #20, Firefox 2 users won't see useful updates until bug 437279 is fixed but I think that would work for the near future and we can close this bug.

Updated

10 years ago
No longer depends on: 423535

Comment 23

9 years ago
UH? Still open??

Version 2.0 (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addons/versions/3445#version-2.0) dated June 7, 2008 fixe Firefox 3.0.x compatibility.

FIXED!

Updated

9 years ago
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.