Closed
Bug 1044423
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Add more logics to AppChrome.js
Categories
(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::System::Browser Chrome, defect)
Firefox OS Graveyard
Gaia::System::Browser Chrome
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: vingtetun, Assigned: vingtetun)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 4 obsolete files)
(deleted),
patch
|
etienne
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
This align better with the UX spec, while providing more features to the chrome UI.
The patch still need more tests and some clean up thought.
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Summary: More browser chrome love → Add more logics to AppChrome.js
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
I need to add some tests for all the new features. But in the meantime I believe that the non-tests part can be reviewed.
Attachment #8462977 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8463109 -
Flags: review?(etienne)
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
Same patch + tests.
Attachment #8463109 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8463109 -
Flags: review?(etienne)
Attachment #8463121 -
Flags: review?(etienne)
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Oups. I made a git commit mistake in the previous patch. Sorry for the noise.
Attachment #8463121 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8463121 -
Flags: review?(etienne)
Attachment #8463123 -
Flags: review?(etienne)
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
I fixed some of the config flags in order to make them more explicit.
Attachment #8463123 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8463123 -
Flags: review?(etienne)
Attachment #8463125 -
Flags: review?(etienne)
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8463125 [details] [diff] [review]
chromebar-additional.patch
Review of attachment 8463125 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
r=me with those comments addressed (mainly test-related)
::: apps/system/js/app_chrome.js
@@ +447,5 @@
>
> + AppChrome.prototype.useCombinedChrome = function ac_useCombinedChrome(evt) {
> + return this.app.config.chrome &&
> + this.app.config.chrome.navigation &&
> + this.app.config.chrome.bar;
are we actually using the combined chrome?
Looks like we could remove a bunch of code (keyboard handling/hiding closing) by getting rid of the navigation at the bottom of the screen. Let's track it in a follow up!
::: apps/system/js/home_searchbar.js
@@ +134,5 @@
> // XXX: fix the WindowManager coupling
> // but currently the transition sequence is crucial for performance
> var app = AppWindowManager.getActiveApp();
> + if (app && !app.manifestURL) {
> + this.setInput(app.config.url);
can you add a small test for this case?
::: apps/system/js/rocketbar.js
@@ +520,5 @@
> + * @memberof Rocketbar.prototype
> + */
> + selectAll: function() {
> + this.input.select();
> + },
can you add a tiny test for this, it will make the homesearchbar/rocketbar merge easier.
::: apps/system/style/chrome/chrome.css
@@ +49,5 @@
> +}
> +
> +.controls .back-button:not([data-disabled]) + .forward-button:not([data-disabled]) + .urlbar {
> + width: calc(100% - 9rem);
> +}
:)
@@ +120,5 @@
> +}
> +
> +
> +/* Progress */
> +.appWindow.navigation .progress {
I think we need to specify .scrollable here.
In an app with bottom navigation it's weird to have the loading in the middle of the app display.
::: apps/system/test/unit/app_chrome_test.js
@@ +311,5 @@
> + var app = new AppWindow(fakeAppConfigBoth);
> + var chrome = new AppChrome(app);
> + chrome.handleEvent({ type: 'mozbrowserloadstart' });
> + assert.isTrue(chrome.containerElement.classList.contains('loading'));
> + assert.isFalse(chrome._titleChanged);
this is testing internal stuffs, can you instead
* add a titlechange test where we get a `looadstart` in between
* add a test for the titlechange with an empty value (this will cover the _currentURL stuff)
Attachment #8463125 -
Flags: review?(etienne) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Etienne Segonzac (:etienne) (PTO -> August 12) from comment #5)
> Comment on attachment 8463125 [details] [diff] [review]
> chromebar-additional.patch
>
> Review of attachment 8463125 [details] [diff] [review]:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> r=me with those comments addressed (mainly test-related)
>
> ::: apps/system/js/app_chrome.js
> @@ +447,5 @@
> >
> > + AppChrome.prototype.useCombinedChrome = function ac_useCombinedChrome(evt) {
> > + return this.app.config.chrome &&
> > + this.app.config.chrome.navigation &&
> > + this.app.config.chrome.bar;
>
> are we actually using the combined chrome?
> Looks like we could remove a bunch of code (keyboard handling/hiding
> closing) by getting rid of the navigation at the bottom of the screen. Let's
> track it in a follow up!
>
I'm keeping the 'navigation' only chrome for now in case some of the dogfood use cases are regressing. So instead of backouting everything I can just adjust some of the 'config' flags and fallback on those. But yeah, we should definitively get rid of all this code before the end of 2.1.
> @@ +120,5 @@
> > +}
> > +
> > +
> > +/* Progress */
> > +.appWindow.navigation .progress {
>
> I think we need to specify .scrollable here.
>
> In an app with bottom navigation it's weird to have the loading in the
> middle of the app display.
>
Oups! Good catch.
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia/commit/792836776749808fec8c6e7ee47999747ed83dec with requested tests.
Assignee: nobody → 21
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•