Closed
Bug 706794
Opened 13 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
Add extensions.strictCompatibility pref to Thunderbird to make addons compatible-by-default
Categories
(Thunderbird :: General, defect)
Thunderbird
General
Tracking
(thunderbird10+ fixed)
RESOLVED
FIXED
Thunderbird 11.0
People
(Reporter: standard8, Assigned: standard8)
References
Details
Attachments
(3 files)
731 bytes,
patch
|
bwinton
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
766 bytes,
patch
|
bwinton
:
review+
standard8
:
approval-comm-aurora+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
870 bytes,
patch
|
Bienvenu
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #698653 +++ Firefox have done this on trunk builds, and I think we should do the same to help testing and get our confidence up. We should also add the pref on aurora but set to disable add-ons by default, so we have the pref there should it need to be flipped, or testers want to flip it.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•13 years ago
|
||
Mainly looking for an rs here. I tested with an extension that is out of date wrt trunk, and it the add-on manager did the expected with this pref.
Attachment #578264 -
Flags: review?(bwinton)
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•13 years ago
|
||
For now, keep strict compatibility turned on on earlybird.
Attachment #578268 -
Flags: review?(bwinton)
Comment 3•13 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 578268 [details] [diff] [review] Aurora fix Review of attachment 578268 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- So… Why do we want strict compatibility in Aurora? Just cause that's what we currently do, and we don't want to change that behaviour until we've done some more testing? (r=me with that question answered.)
Attachment #578268 -
Flags: review?(bwinton) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Blake Winton (:bwinton - Thunderbird UX) from comment #3) > Comment on attachment 578268 [details] [diff] [review] [diff] [details] [review] > Aurora fix > > Review of attachment 578268 [details] [diff] [review] [diff] [details] [review]: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > So… Why do we want strict compatibility in Aurora? Just cause that's what > we currently do, and we don't want to change that behaviour until we've done > some more testing? That's what FF currently does. I believe they don't want it there just yet until they've done more testing.
Comment 5•13 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 578264 [details] [diff] [review] The fix Review of attachment 578264 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- WFM!
Attachment #578264 -
Flags: review?(bwinton) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•13 years ago
|
||
Checked in: http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/e946196ad328
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
tracking-thunderbird10:
--- → +
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Thunderbird 11.0
Assignee | ||
Updated•13 years ago
|
Attachment #578268 -
Flags: approval-comm-aurora+
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•13 years ago
|
||
Landed on aurora: http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/comm-aurora/rev/bf785218e72c
status-thunderbird10:
--- → fixed
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•12 years ago
|
||
We now need to land setting the pref to false on beta, so cancelling the fixed flag so we can check that.
status-thunderbird10:
fixed → ---
Comment 9•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #8) > We now need to land setting the pref to false on beta, so cancelling the > fixed flag so we can check that. My QA checks caught this bug [x.ref https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/SeaMonkey2.7#Bug_Queries], out of curiosity, why are we backout out the pref? (what did I miss along the way?)
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #9) > (In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #8) > > We now need to land setting the pref to false on beta, so cancelling the > > fixed flag so we can check that. > > My QA checks caught this bug [x.ref > https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/SeaMonkey2.7#Bug_Queries], out of > curiosity, why are we backout out the pref? (what did I miss along the way?) I didn't say anything about backing out. I said we need to set the pref to false - if you look at what was landed, the pref is currently true.
Comment 11•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #10) > (In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #9) > > (In reply to Mark Banner (:standard8) from comment #8) > > > We now need to land setting the pref to false on beta, so cancelling the > > > fixed flag so we can check that. > > > > My QA checks caught this bug [x.ref > > https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/SeaMonkey2.7#Bug_Queries], out of > > curiosity, why are we backout out the pref? (what did I miss along the way?) > > I didn't say anything about backing out. I said we need to set the pref to > false - if you look at what was landed, the pref is currently true. Ooooo right, the boolean logic in my head flipped when I commented here. Thanks
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•12 years ago
|
||
Firefox enabled this on aurora, which is now beta after the merge, hence we should do this on beta as its better for extensions.
Attachment #586212 -
Flags: review?(dbienvenu)
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #586212 -
Flags: review?(dbienvenu) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•12 years ago
|
||
Checked in: http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/comm-beta/rev/308536744457
status-thunderbird10:
--- → fixed
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•