(This bug imported from BugSplat, Netscape's internal bugsystem. It was known there as bug #335510 http://scopus.netscape.com/bugsplat/show_bug.cgi?id=335510 Imported into Bugzilla on 03/26/99 10:21) cutomer contact: Frances Li fli@bear.com 973-793-5969` Problem: We need to create two Communicator shortcuts. One use the bear profile and the other use the default profile. When I had the default one up and then tried to launch the other shortcut, it didn't come up. Business: We need to provide a default profile for the users to do regular browsing. When they are in their home page, they can have a link that opens up another Communicator window that use the bear profile and bring them to the Web Shell login page. ------- Additional Comments From gshuss 11/12/98 12:46 ------- Frances, Currently Navigator does not support the second instance with another profile. In the future, additional instances with a different profile will be ignored and will use the original profile. Does this answer your question? Greg

from customer: So you are not going to support two profiles up in the same time. It is very important to our Web Shell. Web Shell has to be run in a specific profile since it requires certain settings and certificates and we distribute this profile to the users. While Web Shell it is up (most of the time it will be up the whole day since it is an entry and base to the other Bear apps), some users need to use their own profile to do other things. What you are telling me is that these users cannot do that as long as we are using Communicator. ------- Status Summary updated by gshuss 11/19/98 9:54 ------- 11-19-98 13:00 opening RFE for supporting 2 profiles simultaneously- GSS

Greg: We will probably not be doing this in the next 4.5x builds. Since 4.51 bug checkin is very tight, I am pretty sure this will not be supported in that release. 5.0 would probably be the next browser that might be able to accomodate this enhancement.

re-opening bug for consideration for 5.0

since this is 5.0 RFE reassigning to chofmann

wondering if this goes on don's list or selmers list.

This is currently a rather complicated thing to do. First, we don't currently even have the ability to switch from one profile to another without completely shutting down the app. Second, doing more than one profile simultaneously would probably imply a huge number of changes throughout the app. I'm thinking of netlib and layout and all the services having to understand the multiple contexts. Edwin Aoki did some work to make the profile manager more of an independent object and was heading in the direction of the profile manager as a separate service. That work would need to be finished as well to make this happen. Ownership of this bug is really a coordination activity if we decided to try to implement this. Someone needs to invent the rules and then do some analysis and then go around and bug everybody to bring their area up to speed. I think this would be a serious hit to the schedule at this moment. This can stay assigned to me for now, but nothing's going to happen in the forseeable future (unless help appears from somewhere.)

Moving all Profile Manager bugs to new Profile Manager Backend component. Profile Manager component to be deleted.

Get off M15 radar.

Reassining to myself.

Running 2 app instaces with two different profiles has never been a part of profile manager design. Even the dynamic profile switch (switching to a different profile while the app is running - a feature that has been cut) will always have a single profile up and running. Profile is a single place to store and distribute the data. To implement the feaure talked about in this bug calls for a change in the ProfileManager architecture. This is not going to addressed in beta3 and will be a future issue if we have a plan to do it. Adding arch keyword.

Doing a mass reassign to Conrad Carlen. Conrad is going address all current and upcoming profile manager issues. Please do not hesitate to involve me in any of the issues.

This is in conflict with bug 32112 which is verified fixed. The resolution there was to make it impossible to run two instances of mozilla at the same time, regardless of which profile. Is this even valid?

marking invalid per comments above

verified

Why is this INVALID just because profile switching was disabled while it was not working. Bug 32112 would be invalid if this bug were fixed, but the reciprocal is not true at all. The reason I wanted came across this bug was that I wanted to be able to have a separate profile for sites that I want to disable javascript for -- such as my web mail site. Bug 75371 should have (IMHO) been done on a per site basis (like images and cookies), but since it wasn't, I was hoping to use separate profiles to accomplish the same thing.