675387 - load/unload overlays from chrome.manifest files loaded dynamically

Status: RESOLVED INACTIVE

(Toolkit :: Add-ons Manager, defect)

Description

[Dave Garrett]

Bootstrapped addons can now use chrome.manifest files but overlay directives cannot be supported until the capability to unload an overlay dynamically is implemented (bug 607384).

Comment 1

[Wladimir Palant]

Note that there are more complications with overlays, e.g. the question when they should initialize themselves. Normally overlays need to wait for the "load" event and only access the DOM after that. An overlay applying to an already open window would need to distinguish that case somehow. Then there are toolbar palettes: they can only be overlaid before the window's "load" event because they are removed from the document after that.

Comment 2

[Pixievolt No. 1]

As https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Extensions/Bootstrapped_extensions is currently written, it is giving restartless add-on developers the impression that they can already go ahead and use overlay directives.

Comment 3

[Eric Shepherd [:sheppy]]

I don't see that; it was specifically written to not mention overlays. I do see someone has added that overlay support should exist in Firefox 10 though.

Comment 4

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

(In reply to Eric Shepherd [:sheppy] from comment #3)
> I don't see that; it was specifically written to not mention overlays. I do
> see someone has added that overlay support should exist in Firefox 10 though.

This isn't true so it should be removed

Comment 5

[Pixievolt No. 1]

"you can use a chrome.manifest file to apply customizations to the application's user interface" does not specifically mention overlays, but it heavily, heavily implies them.

I'm not speaking of some "in theory" thing here; I myself had that impression until I double-checked Bugzilla.

Comment 6

[Pixievolt No. 1]

Oh wait, this quote's even worse: "Prior to Gecko 8.0 (Firefox 8.0 / Thunderbird 8.0 / SeaMonkey 2.5) , implementing bootstrapped extensions that add UI to the application wasn't a trivial task. You couldn't use overlays, you had to manually manipulate the application's DOM."

Comment 7

[Dave Townsend [:mossop]]

(In reply to pikadudeno1+bugzilla from comment #6)
> Oh wait, this quote's even worse: "Prior to Gecko 8.0 (Firefox 8.0 /
> Thunderbird 8.0 / SeaMonkey 2.5) , implementing bootstrapped extensions that
> add UI to the application wasn't a trivial task. You couldn't use overlays,
> you had to manually manipulate the application's DOM."

Would you mind updating all the notes that you think are misleading?

Comment 8

[Mike Kaply [:mkaply]]

Is there any way to distinguish between browser overlays and an extension using overlays in its own window?

It seems to me that if an bootstrapped extension is overlaying it's own window, that should work fine (They shouldn't even need to be unloaded).

(The reason an extension might do that is to separate various modules/pages, like preferences)

Comment 9

[Wladimir Palant]

(In reply to Mike Kaply (:mkaply) from comment #8)
> Is there any way to distinguish between browser overlays and an extension
> using overlays in its own window?
> 
> It seems to me that if an bootstrapped extension is overlaying it's own
> window, that should work fine (They shouldn't even need to be unloaded).
> 
> (The reason an extension might do that is to separate various modules/pages,
> like preferences)

An extension (bootstrapped or not) can use the <?xul-overlay?> tag to overlay its own content, it doesn't need chrome.manifest for that.

Comment 10

[BMO Automation]

Per policy at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bug_Triage/Projects/Bug_Handling/Bug_Husbandry#Inactive_Bugs. If this bug is not an enhancement request or a bug not present in a supported release of Firefox, then it may be reopened.