768388 - Support "hidden" preference for all types for simple-prefs

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Add-on SDK Graveyard :: General, enhancement, P3)

Description

[Petr Janeček]

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/14.0
Build ID: 20120624012213

Steps to reproduce:

Every simple-prefs type should have a preference "hidden" (defaults to false) that, when set, would not show the preference in the addons manager.

Useful for providing advanced / possibly dangerous preferences via about:config for advanced users. Or for internal use when there's need to save something as a pref (say there's a control setting something invisibly) to be synced across browsers.

Comment 1

[Wes Kocher (:KWierso) (Not reading bugmail; email directly if needed)]

You can already sort of do that with the low-level preferences-service module: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/developers/docs/sdk/latest/packages/api-utils/preferences-service.html

Would using that be acceptable for what you want to do?

Comment 2

[Petr Janeček]

Absolutely, that's the stuff I needed. It's just so confusing that it's not on the same place :). Thank you, I guess this can be closed.

Comment 3

[Wes Kocher (:KWierso) (Not reading bugmail; email directly if needed)]

Maybe we can add a bit to simple-prefs documentation pointing out that the preferences-service can be used to get more low-level control over preferences.

Comment 4

[Will Bamberg [:wbamberg]]

Should we keep this bug open, and raise another to update the doc? This sounds like a reasonable feature to ask for in the high level API, and if we make this just a documentation bug, we'll lose that.

Comment 5

[Erik Vold [:erikvold] (please needinfo? me)]

(In reply to Will Bamberg [:wbamberg] from comment #4)
> Should we keep this bug open, and raise another to update the doc? This
> sounds like a reasonable feature to ask for in the high level API, and if we
> make this just a documentation bug, we'll lose that.

A 'hidden' type sounds reasonable for the preference sync'ing use case.  It would also avoid the need for users to set prefs in two places.

Comment 6

[Erik Vold [:erikvold] (please needinfo? me)]

(In reply to Wes Kocher (:KWierso) from comment #3)
> Maybe we can add a bit to simple-prefs documentation pointing out that the
> preferences-service can be used to get more low-level control over
> preferences.

Let's make another bug for that.

Comment 7

[Erik Vold [:erikvold] (please needinfo? me)]

Attachment: Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/1000

Pointer to Github pull-request

Comment 8

[Erik Vold [:erikvold] (please needinfo? me)]

Comment on attachment 750530 [details]
Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/1000

This pull request is now 2 months old, I'm giving it to someone else.

Comment 9

[Irakli Gozalishvili [:irakli] [:gozala] [@gozala]]

Comment on attachment 750530 [details]
Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/1000

Rejecting in order to make hidden be a separate from type as agreed on IRC.

Comment 10

[Erik Vold [:erikvold] (please needinfo? me)]

Attachment: Pointer to Github pull request: https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/pull/1114

Pointer to Github pull-request

Comment 11

[[github robot]]

Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk

https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/commit/cb5d206f778d80eb6c175d2829cca2eb7107d3c3
Bug 768388: support hidden pref type

https://github.com/mozilla/addon-sdk/commit/2a40cf47944fb9e1b45ec019a5495b86d39d0233
Merge pull request #1114 from erikvold/768388v2

Bug 768388: support hidden pref type r=@gozala

Comment 12

[Wes Kocher (:KWierso) (Not reading bugmail; email directly if needed)]

I'm going through the list of open bugs that github robot has commented in. Is this bug fixed, Irakli?

Comment 13

[Irakli Gozalishvili [:irakli] [:gozala] [@gozala]]

(In reply to Wes Kocher (:KWierso) from comment #12)
> I'm going through the list of open bugs that github robot has commented in.
> Is this bug fixed, Irakli?

It seems merged so I guess it is fixed.