Closed Bug 423177 Opened 14 years ago Closed 14 years ago

Update default theme's information for Firefox 3

Categories

(Firefox :: Theme, defect, P2)

defect

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Firefox 3

People

(Reporter: wxpythoner, Assigned: reed)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 13 obsolete files)

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9b4) Gecko/2008030714 Firefox/3.0b4
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9b4) Gecko/2008030714 Firefox/3.0b4

Please change the version of the theme 'Firefox (default)' from version 2.0 to version 3.0. Thank you.

Reproducible: Always
OS: Windows XP → All
Version: unspecified → Trunk
Even the image isn't right (needs to be fixed to update new themes).
Yes, I have forgot to mention the same thing as Raymie just said. Since the theme was changed, the whole thing should be updated, i.e. the theme's version number and also the picture of the theme. Just make that happen 'till the final release of Firefox 3.0. Thank you and God speed! ;)
(There are new ones needed for each new theme: Vista, XP, Mac OS X, Linux)
em:creator should be updated, too. Should it just be mozilla.org, or should it be different per OS?
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Flags: blocking-firefox3?
Hardware: PC → All
Summary: Default theme of Firefox 3.0 is of version 2.0? Change the theme's version → Update default theme's information for Firefox 3
Attached patch patch - v1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This just updates the version of the theme to 3.0 and changes the creator to "mozilla.org". We could preprocess it and specify a different creator per OS if you want...
Assignee: nobody → reed
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #309673 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Reed Loden, please consider changing the picture of the theme as well and adapt it, i.e. change the buttons in the picture to be the same as they are for in this 3.0 version of the theme. Thank you.
(In reply to comment #6)
> Reed Loden, please consider changing the picture of the theme as well and adapt
> it, i.e. change the buttons in the picture to be the same as they are for in
> this 3.0 version of the theme. Thank you.

New icons for the theme preview are being handled as part of the icon inventory / theme refresh in bug 399398. :)
Yeah we will probably update that image last so we don't have to change it as other things change.
"Mozilla" would be more appropriate than "mozilla.org".
(In reply to comment #9)
> "Mozilla" would be more appropriate than "mozilla.org".

I chose "mozilla.org" based off past history.

DOMi uses "mozilla.org", vendorShortName / CompanyName for unofficial branding is "mozilla.org", chrome:author for several .rdf files is "mozilla.org", and there's some other places that use "mozilla.org", too.
that should probably change at some point. mozilla.org is at best meaningless in this context and at worse, actually misleading. 
Flags: blocking-firefox3? → blocking-firefox3+
Priority: -- → P2
Duplicate of this bug: 424032
Attached patch patch - v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #310738 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attached patch patch -v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #310739 - Flags: approval1.9b5?
Attachment #310739 - Attachment description: patch -v2 → patch - v2
Attachment #310739 - Attachment filename: install.rdf.in.txt → 432177
Attachment #310739 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #310739 - Flags: approval1.9b5?
Comment on attachment 310739 [details] [diff] [review]
patch -v2

Please do not request approval on unreviewed patches. And in the future use cvs diff to generate proper patches, this one has no header information.
Attachment #310739 - Attachment description: patch - v2 → patch -v2
Attachment #310739 - Attachment filename: 432177 → install.rdf.in.txt
Attachment #310739 - Attachment is obsolete: false
Attached patch patch - v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #310739 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #310740 - Flags: approval1.9b5?
Comment on attachment 310740 [details] [diff] [review]
patch - v2

Still not reviewed. Again, please don't do this, it only wastes people's time.
Attachment #310740 - Flags: approval1.9b5?
Attached patch patch - v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #310740 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #310741 - Flags: approval1.9b5?
Comment on attachment 310741 [details] [diff] [review]
patch - v2

Approval denied: if you request approval again on an unreviewed patch, it is just a waste of scarce time.  If you continue, I'm afraid you risk having your account restricted or disabled.
Attachment #310741 - Flags: approval1.9b5? → approval1.9b5-
Attached patch patch - v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #310741 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #310844 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attached patch patch - v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #310844 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #310850 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attachment #310844 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Comment on attachment 310850 [details] [diff] [review]
patch - v2

This looks right to me; one nit would be that I think the name works better as "Default", not "Firefox Default". 

For contributors, we might want to call out those who were significant to this release:

Steven Garrity, Kevin Gerich, Stephen Horlander, Michael Monreal, Michael Ventnor, and other Mozilla contributors.
Attachment #310850 - Flags: ui-review+
Reed informs me that "Tango Icon Team" would be a better contributor shout out, so perhaps instead:

<em:contributors>Kevin Gerich, Stephen Horlander, Tango Icon Team, Iconfactory, and other Mozilla contributors.</em:contributors>
Attached patch patch - v2.1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
I have updated the patch according to the comments. Is it okay now? If anyone has any new suggestion, please don't hold it.
Attachment #310850 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #311054 - Flags: ui-review?
Attachment #310850 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attached patch patch - v2.2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This is probably the best. The previous patch had too many names so they didn't fit in the line. The contributors list is in fact really long, but we should mention two names and then all the others. I hope no one feels excluded by doing this.
Attachment #311054 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #311057 - Flags: ui-review?
Attachment #311054 - Flags: ui-review?
(In reply to comment #25)
> This is probably the best. The previous patch had too many names so they didn't
> fit in the line. The contributors list is in fact really long, but we should
> mention two names and then all the others. I hope no one feels excluded by
> doing this.

You can list the contributors in multiple <em:contributor> sections which would be the best thing here, however might as well hold fire till the patch is re-reviewed to pick up any additional suggestions from that.
Attached patch patch - v2.3 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Please also look at this line:
<em:internalName>classic/1.0</em:internalName>

Shouldn't it be
<em:internalName>Classic/3.0</em:internalName>    ???
Attachment #311057 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #311061 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311057 - Flags: ui-review?
(In reply to comment #27)
> Shouldn't it be
> <em:internalName>Classic/3.0</em:internalName>    ???

No the internalName must remain the same.
Attached patch patch - v3Splinter Review
This gets rid of any worries about crediting certain people and just makes it completely generic.
Attachment #311129 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311129 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attached patch patch - v4 (final) (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This is a fix of 'patch - v3'. It is fixed to the perfection now, so please apply this one.
Attachment #311061 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #311169 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311169 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311061 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attached patch patch - v5 (final) (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This is a polish on the 'patch - v4 (final)'.
Attachment #311169 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #311172 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311172 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311169 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311169 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attached patch patch - v6 (really final!!) (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Okay, this is the ultimate thing now.
Attachment #311172 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #311173 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311173 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311172 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311172 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Can everyone stop attaching patches here?  Want to make a call on the idea of whether to credit specific elements to specific people, which has merit, and needs to be considered in the context of the larger credits tracking, which i need to solve as well.
Comment on attachment 311129 [details] [diff] [review]
patch - v3

This is good enough for now, still not sure whether this is the final solution I'd prefer, but it'll do for now.
Attachment #311129 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311129 - Flags: ui-review+
Attachment #311129 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311129 - Flags: review+
Attachment #309673 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Checking in browser/app/profile/extensions/{972ce4c6-7e08-4474-a285-3208198ce6fd}/install.rdf.in;
/cvsroot/mozilla/browser/app/profile/extensions/{972ce4c6-7e08-4474-a285-3208198ce6fd}/install.rdf.in,v  <--  install.rdf.in
new revision: 1.9; previous revision: 1.8
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 3
Attachment #311173 - Flags: ui-review?(mconnor)
Attachment #311173 - Flags: review?(mconnor)
Attachment #309673 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #311173 - Attachment is obsolete: true
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.