Suggestion from Ehsan: "Further more, it would be nice to test everything that tabview does in PB mode as well. I guess we could move tests which make sense in that situation to a sub-directory, and once run them outside of PB mode, and once again inside this mode." I'm not sure how one would go about doing this, but presumably it's possible.

(In reply to comment #0) > Suggestion from Ehsan: "Further more, it would be nice to test everything that > tabview does in PB mode as well. I guess we could move tests which make sense > in that situation to a sub-directory, and once run them outside of PB mode, and > once again inside this mode." > > I'm not sure how one would go about doing this, but presumably it's possible. It's possible using some Makefile trickery. Let me know if you need help.

(In reply to comment #1) > It's possible using some Makefile trickery. Let me know if you need help. Yes please!

Here's how you can run the tests in both modes. After this patch, those tests which should be run both in normal and private browsing mode should be added to $_PRIVATE_SAFE_BROWSER_FILES. Those tests which should only be run in normal mode (such as those which explicitly switch into private mode and back) should be added to $_BROWSER_FILES (note: after the first such test is added, the two lines under "libs:: $(_BROWSER_FILES)" should be uncommented). $_PRIVATE_SAFE_SUPPORT_FILES should probably never be touched. Note that a lot of the tests fails in private mode. I didn't investigate them. Some of them might be fixed by your other PB related patches. Others might need their own patches, but it should definitely be investigated.

This seems like hygiene we should take care of by 1.0? Ian/Ehsan can we push this until later?

(In reply to comment #4) > This seems like hygiene we should take care of by 1.0? Ian/Ehsan can we push > this until later? I don't think that this is a matter of hygiene. We need to make sure that TabView is capable of handling the PB mode, and this might actually uncover yet unknown bugs in TabView code.

Moving this up to b8, then. It's a lower priority than fixing more visible bugs (and speccing perf) but PB is a core Firefox feature that we need to support.

bug spam (moving to b10)

bug spam

We want this, just so we can sleep better at night. Ehsan, any chance you can look at this again? Otherwise, anyone, feel free to pick this up!

(In reply to comment #9) > We want this, just so we can sleep better at night. > > Ehsan, any chance you can look at this again? Otherwise, anyone, feel free to > pick this up! I _could_, but this should be fairly easy for anybody on the panorama team to pick up based on comment 3. Is there nobody else who can work on this?

(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > We want this, just so we can sleep better at night. > > > > Ehsan, any chance you can look at this again? Otherwise, anyone, feel free to > > pick this up! > > I _could_, but this should be fairly easy for anybody on the panorama team to > pick up based on comment 3. Is there nobody else who can work on this? Oh, no. We'll find someone who can work on this. Just asked you first because you started us on this. ;) Thanks!

Tracking this under final, actually, as this is a test change/improvement and thus we *maybe* could land this after beta 11.

bugspam

bugspam

bugspam

bugspam (Fx7 was branched, removing open bugs from Fx7 meta bug, we won't create new meta bugs for upcoming Fx versions)

Panorama has been removed from Firefox 45, currently in Beta and scheduled for release on March 7th. As such, I'm closing all existing Panorama bugs. If you are still using Panorama, you will see a deprecation message in Firefox 44, and when 45 is released your tab group data will be migrated to bookmarks, with a folder for each group. There are also a few addons offering similar functionality. See https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/tab-groups-removal for more info. We're removing Panorama because it has extremely low usage (about 0.01% of users), and has a large number of bugs and usability issues. The cost of fixing all those issues is far too high to justify, and so we'll instead be focusing our time and energy on improving other parts of Firefox.