Closed Bug 413882 Opened 16 years ago Closed 16 years ago
Google Docs almost unusable
With google spreadsheets, when trying to enter anything into a cell, I frequently have to command + tab to make firefox lose focus, command + tab back, then press enter to get anything to work. Sometimes it works when I just press enter. On irc someone had mentioned that there was a focus patch that had landed recently for cocoa widgets, and no windows user could confirm this. This is a fairly recent regression (within the last week), but I don't know when exactly.
OK, how do you get to "google spreadsheets"?
Nevermind, I figured it out. But I'm not able to reproduce what you report. I opened a new spreadsheet and typed stuff into the first cell -- no problems. Then I moused to or tabbed to new (or existing) cells, typed more text, and still had no problems. Please provide more detail.
That doesn't even work for me. I'll try it in a clean profile later today, but I don't know how an addon could be messing with this :/
Shawn: Are you running Tiger or Leopard?
Marcia, thanks for the suggestion. I can't reproduce this on Leopard, either. So now I've tested (with today's Minefield nightly) on both Tiger and Leopard -- no problems on either.
I'm on Tiger. I'll be around for the work week next week if that will help anyone.
Product: Firefox → Core
QA Contact: general → general
I'm not going to be at the work week, though Josh will. But there currently isn't enough information in this bug to do anything with, and there are a number of (easy) things you can do before the work week, which might be really helpful: 1) Test with a clean profile. 2) Test with a new account (this is a bit of a stretch, but I've seen it resolve some of the wierder JEP problems). 3) Then if the problem keeps happening, test with nightlies until you find the precise regression range.
I have another bug on file related to Google documents. I have found when using it that some things don't work well on Mac (this is back when I was using it heavily for a class). I will take a look at this on Tiger and Leopard and report back if I am able to reproduce what shawn is seeing.
More details since I just got slightly better steps to reproduce: It happens when I use the mouse on the page, and then try to do keyboard entry. So, say I click in a cell, and try to start typing. It doesn't work. However, if I switch away from Minefield, and switch back, it works. I'm able to reproduce that 100% of the time. Still need to try a clean profile.
Reproducible on a clean profile as well.
And on a new spreadsheet in a clean profile. (sorry for bugspam, forgot to add that last bit before I submitted last comment)
Shawn, are you using any input managers (in /Library/InputManager or /System/Library/InputManager)? They're a notorious source of trouble.
I'm pretty sure I'm not, and I'm seeing the same issue (its a painful painful bug)
OK, what I _really_ need is enough information to reproduce this bug myself. We're not anywhere close yet.
I don't use any input managers (or at least I've never done anything with it). Other than a regression range, what else do you need (I don't quite have time for find the regression range just yet).
The regression range is really important -- so if I don't get one from you (Shawn), I need it from someone else. I'd also really like to see what happens when you make a new account and test in that. But even more important is a precise description of the steps leading up to the problem. Here's something to try for anyone who has this problem: 1) Quit everything and restart your computer. 2) As the very first thing you do, start Minefield. 3) As the very first thing you do, go to Google Documents (http://documents.google.com) and do _exactly_ what's needed to make this problem happen. Then describe here that sequence of steps. It's always possible that bad interactions with other software are involved ... but that's harder to test for. Before anything else, I need a good, clean, detailed and precise description of the steps leading up to this problem. Which (with luck) I'll be able to use myself to reproduce the problem.
> I don't use any input managers (or at least I've never done anything > with it). This is very easy to check for. Look in /Library/InputManager, /System/Library/InputManager and ~/Library/InputManager. If those directories are empty or don't exist, you're not using any input managers. If any of them isn't empty, then you're quite likely to be using an input manager. If any of them isn't empty, move their contents elsewhere, restart your computer, and test again.
I have been able to reproduce this bug on Tiger using Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.4; en-US; rv:1.9b3pre) Gecko/2008012504 Minefield/3.0b3pre. STR: 1. Create a new spreadsheet. 2. Use the mouse to click in the first cell and type a single letter. 3. Use the mouse to click in the cell beneath the first cell and type a single letter. Result: I cannot type in the cell beneath that original cell until I switch focus out of Google docs. The same thing does not seem to happen if I move horizontally across the page, only vertically down the page.
Thank you, Marcia!!!! I can now reproduce the problem. In a few minutes I'll have a regression range.
The regression range is between the 2008-01-17-04-trunk nightly, which doesn't have the problem, and the 2008-01-18-04-trunk nightly, which does. So yes, my patch for bug 403232 does seem to be implicated :-( I'll be working on this.
Assignee: nobody → joshmoz
Component: General → Widget: Cocoa
QA Contact: general → cocoa
Here's a patch that fixes this problem. My patch for bug 403232 stopped spurious NS_LOSTFOCUS and NS_GOTFOCUS being sent to Gecko from [ChildView becomeFirstResponder:] and [ChildView resignFirstResponder:]. But it turns out that it also stopped some needed focus events from being sent. This patch restores at least some of them. (mouseDown events can change focus. When they do and Gecko is involved, NS_LOSTFOCUS and NS_GOTFOCUS events should be sent to the appropriate nsChildView objects.) I tested on both OS X 10.4.11 and 10.5.1. This patch doesn't fix the problem on Camino, and I need to find out why. But it works fine in Minefield, and a fix is urgently needed for beta3. So I think I can postpone finding a fix for Camino.
Here's a tryserver build made using this patch (attachment 300112 [details] [diff] [review]). It urgently needs fairly wide testing. Everyone here please test whatever you do on Google docs with this build. Marcia, could you give this patch what testing you can, and (if need be) also arrange for others to test it? https://build.mozilla.org/tryserver-builds/2008-01-29_12:email@example.comfirstname.lastname@example.org
This is working great for me!
> This is working great for me! Glad to hear it! Thanks for letting me know.
Steven: I gave the build a cursory look on Leopard, using Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9b3pre) Gecko/2008012912 Minefield/3.0b3pre. While I see Shawn's issue addressed, using Leopard I can't click the New widget to create a new spreadsheet or any kind of document on the docs home page. My workaround was to go to an existing spreadsheet I had already created and then add a new one from the link there. I recall that link worked when I tested shawn' issue the other day since I am sure I created the spreadsheet from that entry point. STR: 1. Go to docs.google.com 2. Access the "New" widget on the left hand side of the page. 3. Click to create a new spreadsheet. Result: Nothing happens and no errors in console. Next I will try the build on Tiger to see if the same thing occurs.
Here's a minor revision to my patch that makes it work on both Minefield and Camino. Yes, the addition is ugly ... but the same ugliness was also needed in SetFocus() (in my patch for bug 403232). A tryserver build will follow shortly.
Comment on attachment 300166 [details] [diff] [review] Fix rev1 (works on both Minefield and Camino) Sigh. You're right, Marcia. I can reproduce what you report on both 10.4.11 and 10.5.1 (with both versions of my patch). Thanks very much, though, for testing.
This is going to be a bit of a slog. I'll keep working on it (though probably not very much more tonight). But I'm almost certainly not going to make the beta3 freeze. So will this have to go in after the freeze? Should beta3 be postponed for this?
Steven: The "New" link and the"More actions" both do not work for me on Tiger using the tryserver build. The rest of the items on that line work for me.
Moving this to P2 given timing and risk. This'll have to go in after beta3.
Priority: P1 → P2
For what it's worth (probably not much), here's a tryserver build of rev1 of my patch: https://build.mozilla.org/tryserver-builds/2008-01-29_15:email@example.comfirstname.lastname@example.org
Attachment #300166 - Attachment is obsolete: true
I've moved my fix to a new location -- where it works much better. But I've found that, despite all my efforts, I can't avoid regressing bug 404433. This bug (bug 413882) seems much worse than bug 404433. So, if we have to choose between the two, I think it's more important to fix this one. I'll keep looking for a way to fix this bug without regressing bug 404433 ... but I doubt I'll be able to find one in time for the Firefox 3 release. Here's a tryserver build made using this patch. https://build.mozilla.org/tryserver-builds/2008-02-05_11:email@example.comfirstname.lastname@example.org Marcia (and anyone else who's willing), please test this build to see if there's anything I missed.
smichaud, I can verify that your tryserver build fixes the bug. I am running it on Leopard 10.5.1.
Thanks, pjcabrera, for letting me know. I particularly want to hear from heavy users of Google documents (which, for some reason, seems likely to trigger focus problems). Marcia? :-)
Steven: As soon as I can finish my B3 testing, I am all over that tryserver build and will report back.
Thanks, Marcia. If there's a problem with my patch (beyond the regression of bug 404433 that I'm already aware of), I trust you'll find it :-)
smichaud, I see a weird interaction with Growl notifications with your tryserver build: e.g. when a Growl message bubble from, say, Twitterrific, floats over the Firefox window, and I click on the Growl message bubble to make it go away, I can't get focus to go back to the Firefox window. I have to command-tab and make focus go to another app, then command-tab again to return to the Firefox window. Same behavior as with this bug, but from an apparent different source of loss of focus. I've verified with Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9b3) Gecko/2008020511 Firefox/3.0b3 build from today's testing, using another test profile. The weird interaction with Growl doesn't happen there.
By lack of focus, I mean keyboard and mouse clicking are apparently not received. I can't switch tabs with mouse or keyboard shortcuts, can't get focus back by clicking anywhere. It's not just loss of keyboard focus.
pjcabrera, I don't know how to set myself up to receive Growl notifications. Please tell me.
Adium uses growl, and it'd probably be the easiest way for you to get some. Just have a friend im you each time you need to test it.
Once you have installed and set up Growl, restarting Growl-enabled applications should make the apps "register" themselves for notification of events through Growl. If that doesn't work, reinstall the app. Adium, Firefox, Twitterrific and NetNewsWire are Growl-enabled, among others. To see what apps have registered with Growl, you can open the Growl Systems Preferences panel, and click on the "Applications" tab. Then you can unregister and re-register apps with Growl by setting and unsetting the checkboxes. Once apps have registered with Growl, it's just a matter of waiting for (or forcing) an app to report an event through Growl while the Firefox window has focus. For example, use Twitterrific to see tweets from the public timeline (lots of traffic there, guaranteed to make Twitterrific report an event through Growl in a very short timeframe.)
So, pjcabrera, Growl and Twitteriffic are seperate applications ... which I didn't know :-) So, Shawn, could I do this? 1) Run Adium on my target machine (the one I'll test on) and connect to, say, #macdev. 2) Switch the focus to Minefield, in an open browser window. 3) Connect to #macdev from another computer, under a different nickname. 4) Do "/msg smichaud" in the im client running on that other computer.
Yes, but I don't know if Adium does irc. I think that colloquy would work in that situation.
(In reply to comment #37 and comment #38) > smichaud, I see a weird interaction with Growl notifications with > your tryserver build: [...] I momentarily saw something like you report (but not as severe) with today's Minefield nightly (i.e. without my patch). But now I can't reproduce it, either with today's nightly or with a build made with my patch on top of source code pulled this morning. I suspect this problem (whatever it is) is unrelated. Though it would help if you could give me good "steps to reproduce". On general principles I'm going to make another tryserver build (with the same patch). It will supercede the earlier one (after it becomes available, people should test with the new one). (By the way, the source of my Growl notifications was Colloquy, running in the background. I tested on OS X 10.5.1.)
Steven: Gave your build a quick whirl and things look good. I tried all the various combinations of document and spreadsheets I could try including creating a new document and spreadsheet, saving, renaming, etc. I did not see an hiccups. (In reply to comment #45) > Created an attachment (id=302658) [details] > Fix rev 2.1 (update for current code) > > Here's the new tryserver build: > > https://build.mozilla.org/tryserver-builds/2008-02-11_12:email@example.comfirstname.lastname@example.org >
I am downloading your latest tryserver build at the moment. I will see if I can reproduce the issue. If I can reproduce it, I'll write detailed steps for you to verify. I'll let you know what happens either way. :-)
I am unable to reproduce the Growl issue with this latest tryserver build. I ran it on 10.5.1 with several Growl notification sources. You're probably right and the Growl weirdness from Friday was unrelated to your patch. Good job on the Google Docs fix. :-)
Comment on attachment 302658 [details] [diff] [review] Fix rev 2.1 (update for current code) As you probably guessed, I don't like this swizzling at all. I think our Cocoa widget focus code has some fundamental issues that aren't gecko bugs (while those exist too). This patch seems to be taking us even further away from a reasonable impl. We had focus working just fine with Carbon widgets and we don't have any less info given to us with which to determine focus behavior in Cocoa widgets, afaict. We need to attack the fundamental issues here instead of going further and further out on a limb. There is time for that (not much, but enough I think). I can help you with this over the next week or two. For now, please explain little more why swizzling gives us information or capabilities that we couldn't obtain without it. I find it hard to believe that we need to intercept information at the window level in the embedding situation. If you just want to find out that a view lost first responder and other got it, why exactly don't you just use the normal mechanisms for that? + NSLog(@"NSWindow sendEvent: view hierarchy above oldFirstResponder:"); Also you left a bunch of active logging code in the patch.
Thank you, Marcia and pjcabrera. I think your results show that my patch works reasonably well, and that I'm on the right track.
> As you probably guessed, I don't like this swizzling at all. There's no good reason not to like it (or its cousin poseAsClass:). As with anything that gets into undocumented parts of the OS, it should be used with caution, and only when no other, better solution exists. But there is no performance penalty (method swizzling and poseAsClass: basically just swap method pointers inside the Objective-C architecture). And if you choose carefully the methods that you "swizzle", there should be no problems going forward. In this case I'm "swizzling" [NSWindow sendEvent:], which has existed in the same form since the earliest days of OS X, and is very likely to do on doing so. (And in the very unlikely event that Apple _did_ change [NSWindow sendEvent:], or dropped it altogether, method swizzling and poseAsClass both fail gracefully -- trying to "hook" an [NSWindow sendEvent:] would simply have no effect.)
> For now, please explain little more why swizzling gives us > information or capabilities that we couldn't obtain without it. I've already answered this question, in my comment above nsCocoaWindow_NSWindow_sendEvent: +// For non-embedders (e.g. Firefox and Seamonkey), it would probably only be +// necessary to add a sendEvent: method to the ToolbarWindow class. But +// embedders (like Camino) generally create their own NSWindows. So in order +// to fix this problem everywhere, it's necessary to "hook" NSWindow's own +// sendEvent: method.
I don't like it because it appears to be unnecessary and obfuscating, not because I think the technique of swizzling itself is dangerous.
> don't like it because it appears to be unnecessary and obfuscating, What does this mean, if anything. > because I think the technique of swizzling itself is dangerous. Only if used incorrectly.
That comment doesn't answer my question, I'll clarify. Cocoa has methods, "becomeFirstResponder" and "resignFirstResponder", for handling changes to the first responder. That, combined with window activation information (key/main status notifications), should tell you everything you need to know. Why do you need to use data from sendEvent: to figure that stuff out?
> We need to attack the fundamental issues here instead of going > further and further out on a limb. There is time for that (not much, > but enough I think). I can help you with this over the next week or > two. I've been working on this (off and on) for several months. You haven't. Yes, we should tackle the fundamental issues. But, frankly, in all the time I've spent on this I'm only just beginning to see what they might be. I'm convince there _isn't_ enough time to come to grips with these "fundamental issues" before the Firefox 3 release, and that trying to do so would just waste time better spent elsewhere. > This patch seems to be taking us even further away from a reasonable > impl. This is just flat out wrong. My patch for bug 403232 resolved quite a few problems. And while it did cause an important regression (notably this bug), it took quite a while for it to surface -- a sign that even the patch for bug 403232 was quite _close_ to right. If you have a solution that's close to right, the reasonable thing to do is tweak it until it _is_ right. That's what I'm doing with attachment 302658 [details] [diff] [review].
> Cocoa has methods, "becomeFirstResponder" and > "resignFirstResponder", for handling changes to the first responder. Look at my patch for bug 403232. It was these methods that we used before that patch. Doing so whenever these methods were called was what caused the problems that the patch for bug 403232 fixed.
+ [self nsCocoaWindow_NSWindow_sendEvent:anEvent]; How does that not hang the browser? Doesn't it just call itself until it runs out of stack space?
>+ [self nsCocoaWindow_NSWindow_sendEvent:anEvent]; > > Doesn't it just call itself until it runs out of stack space? Nope. That method swizzling at work. See http://www.cocoadev.com/index.pl?MethodSwizzling for an explanation.
Comment on attachment 302924 [details] [diff] [review] Fix rev 2.2 (get rid of debug logging) Since we're sticking with your approach for now this is a win, I'll yield to expediency. However, I stand by what I said before and I hope we have time to investigate further.
Comment on attachment 302924 [details] [diff] [review] Fix rev 2.2 (get rid of debug logging) I feel similar to Josh, we're off in the weeds here. I only hope that we'll be able to rework things significantly post-FF3.
Attachment #302924 - Flags: superreview?(roc) → superreview+
Landed on trunk. Checking in widget/src/cocoa/nsChildView.mm; /cvsroot/mozilla/widget/src/cocoa/nsChildView.mm,v <-- nsChildView.mm new revision: 1.306; previous revision: 1.305 done Checking in widget/src/cocoa/nsCocoaWindow.mm; /cvsroot/mozilla/widget/src/cocoa/nsCocoaWindow.mm,v <-- nsCocoaWindow.mm new revision: 1.129; previous revision: 1.128 done Checking in widget/src/cocoa/nsToolkit.h; /cvsroot/mozilla/widget/src/cocoa/nsToolkit.h,v <-- nsToolkit.h new revision: 1.17; previous revision: 1.16 done Checking in widget/src/cocoa/nsToolkit.mm; /cvsroot/mozilla/widget/src/cocoa/nsToolkit.mm,v <-- nsToolkit.mm new revision: 1.30; previous revision: 1.29 done
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Depends on: 417636
It's hard to be sure, but my patch for this bug (bug 413882, attachment 302924 [details] [diff] [review]) may have caused a crash bug in Camino (bug 417636). If I'm right about this, sending a focus event to Gecko can cause a widget (and its ChildView object) to be destroyed. So in nsCocoaWindow.mm's nsCocoaWindow_NSWindow_sendEvent: I need to retain and release _both_ oldFirstResponder and newFirstResponder around calls that send focus events to Gecko. (Previously I only retained and released oldFirstResponder.) My new patch implements this change, and also another one suggested by Stuart Morgan: I only need to retain and release oldFirstResponder (or newFirstResponder) if they're ChildView objects. So that's what I'm now doing. The reason it's hard to be sure is that bug 417636 isn't reproducible. But a crash log posted there strongly suggests that the crash happened because a focus event was sent to a ChildView object that had been destroyed.
Looks like the changes to mozilla/widget/cocoa/nsChildview.mm rev 1.306 (smichaud%pobox.com 2008-02-13 07:57) caused the same issues as outlined (and previously fixed) in Bug 357535. I reverted to 1.305 and that clears the other bug up for me.
Bug 418031 filed.
Comment on attachment 303612 [details] [diff] [review] Fix bug 417636 Another, better fix is coming up.
My patch for this bug regressed bug 403232, bug 404433 and bug 357535 (aka bug 418031). I've now posted a patch at bug 404433 that fixes all these bugs without regressing this one. It also retains the code that was suggested by Stuart Morgan. To test it, please go to bug 404433 (where I've posted a tryserver build).
We're just thrashing around uselessly here. At minimum, before we touch this code again we need mochitests for the entire set of known related bugs.
Attachment #303612 - Attachment is obsolete: true
I just ran the complete set of Mochitests on my test build (built with my patch). There were no failures: Passed: 47025 Failed:0 Todo: 114
That's good, but we need mochitests that specifically test these bugs at least: 413882 403232 404433 418031 BTW your patch description in bug 404433 sounds good although I haven't read the patch itself yet.
> we need mochitests that specifically test these bugs at least: > 413882 > 403232 > 404433 > 418031 I don't know how to write mochitests. Can we ask someone else to do that?
Mochitests are fairly simple --- although writing tests for these bugs might be tricky. Trying grepping for existing mochitests that manipulate focus. Alternatively, bribe Martijn into helping you :-).
> we need mochitests that specifically test these bugs at least: > 413882 > 403232 > 404433 > 418031 Two of these bugs' STRs (bug 404433 and bug 413882) require a Google account. I assume this means that it won't be possible to write mochitests that use their current STRs (though Martijn can tell me if I'm wrong). Finding new STRs for these bugs will be a _lot_ of work, and probably take a long time -- time we (and I) don't have in the leadup to beta4. And even for the other two bugs, it'll take me a while (a day or two?) to get up to speed writing mochitests. All of these bugs have good (100% effective) STRs, and there aren't too many of them. Yes, we eventually want mochitests for all of them. But in the meantime I think we can rely on testing "by hand".
It absolutely should not take a day or two to get up to speed on Mochitests (I'd say /maybe/ an hour or two); if it does, we're doing something wrong.
The mochitests wouldn't use Google Docs, they'd be reduced testcases. Although since you understand the bugs pretty well, you can probably just write testcases from scratch. We can't rely on testing "by hand" since it hasn't worked so far. It won't take you a day or two to get up to speed on Mochitests. It might take a day or two to come up with appropriate testcases. That would be time well spent.
> You can post at http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/ with the WYSIWYG > editor if you need an example. Do you know of a forum there that I can post messages to (or start to) without having to register?
Anonymous/Unlogged-In users cannot use WYSIWYG editor on vBulletin forums have to have an account. If you can't create an account there at www.vbulletin.com/forum/ then I can create one on my personal forums and email you username/password.
Don't worry about it. I've registered and am now able to use the post editor. But I'm not able to reproduce what you report (using the tryserver build made with my rev1 patch, attachment 304062 [details] [diff] [review]). I clicked on "vBulletin Suggestions and Feedback", then on the "New Thread" button. Then I clicked in the Message box and started typing. I had no problems.
Are you using the Full WYSIWYG editor, should have been an option. I'll download the tryserver build.
tryserver did indeed work just fine. The patch I applied was: bugzilla404433-patch-cvs.txt Index: widget/src/cocoa/nsCocoaWindow.mm =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/mozilla/widget/src/cocoa/nsCocoaWindow.mm,v retrieving revision 1.131 diff -U 10 -r1.131 nsCocoaWindow.mm --- widget/src/cocoa/nsCocoaWindow.mm 16 Feb 2008 20:33:32 -0000 1.131 +++ widget/src/cocoa/nsCocoaWindow.mm 17 Feb 2008 23:33:04 -0000
> The patch I applied was: > bugzilla404433-patch-cvs.txt Wrong patch (not the latest). The one you should be using is bugzilla404433-patch-rev1-cvs.txt (attachment 304052 [details] [diff] [review]). I think I finally got the number right :-)
Ok, using the correct patch. Everything works for me. 1) vBulletin works, previous comment rescinded. (Comment 77) 2) Google Docs Spreadsheet focus is fine. (Though nasty scroll bar in each cell per Bug 416752) 3) Thunderbird Format Toolbar is functioning. (Bug 418031).
verified fixed using Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9b4pre) Gecko/2008022104 Minefield/3.0b4pre and on the nightly Tiger build as well. I tested Google docs and everything looks good there - I do see the scroll bar in each cell that Jay notes in Comment 85. thanks jay for following up and testing the other items you note in Comment 85.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
I don't know if this was caused by this bug, or if I should file a new bug on this, so I'm just going to comment. Now in gmail and google docs, if I click to select a tab, I have to click in the content area to be able to use the keyboard. So, if I click my gmail tab, I have to click in the content area to use the keyboard shortcuts, and in docs I have to click again in the active cell to be able to start to type there. I don't recall having to do that before.
Shawn, I don't know what this means :-)
What doesn't make sense - I know I've had a long day, and I'm not sure if it's new bug worthy.
I just need more clarity and more detail. Feel free to wait til tomorrow. I'm not going to do any more work on this bug tonight :-)
(Following up comment #74) I've spent the last 4 or 5 days trying to write an automated test for bug 403232. I've discovered problems that will either make this impossible or very difficult. See bug 419466. For other problems I encountered along the way, see bug 418745 and bug 418859.
(In reply to comment #90) > I just need more clarity and more detail. > > Feel free to wait til tomorrow. > > I'm not going to do any more work on this bug tonight :-) Still haven't had time to write this up, but there happens to be a newsgroup post on this very issue! http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.apps.firefox/browse_thread/thread/62cf7e4b67e4e041/3c6c00dd27ed3d60#3c6c00dd27ed3d60
(In reply to comment #95) Neither you nor TJ (who started the Google thread) give specific examples of problems with keyboard shortcuts (with complete STRs). These are needed. When you're ready, please open a new bug and cc me. Also take a look at bug 413681 comment #18 and following, which may be relevant. (The earlier comments go all over the map, and aren't very useful.) As for TJ's problem with the Esc key, it may be a dup of bug 415437 (and already fixed in the latest nightlies).
(In reply to comment #61) > Since we're sticking with your approach for now this is a win, I'll yield to > expediency. However, I stand by what I said before and I hope we have time to > investigate further. (In reply to comment #62) > I feel similar to Josh, we're off in the weeds here. I only hope that we'll be > able to rework things significantly post-FF3. Was a bug filed to rework this? Was any investigation done?
Erm... Hello, Was a bug filed to rework this "significantly post-FF3"? Was any investigation done? I ask because, here we are finishing Firefox 3.1 work and I only see more swizzling being done, not less, despite those comments. I'd like to know if there are plans to change that for 1.9.2, especially given the focus rewrite being done. Hopefully this will no longer be needed.
The focus rewrite should give us a good base to clean up the Cocoa focus handling.
(In reply to comment #99) > The focus rewrite should give us a good base to clean up the Cocoa focus > handling. What bug number is the Cocoa work?
I don't think we have one.
So, the answer to comment 98 is "no". Can we get a bug on file from someone who has an understanding of what might/would need to happen after the focus rewrite lands?
There is cleanup code for Cocoa widget focus in Neil Deakin's patch for bug 178324, at least there was last time I looked. That's a start.
Issue is Resolved - removing QA-Wanted Keywords - QA-Wanted query clean-up task
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.