SeaMonkey already has "Show Image" feature, but is missing the "not-successfully-loaded" part: http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvslog.cgi?file=mozilla/browser/base/content/nsContextMenu.js&rev=1.35 In case that situation would have been intentional, we should just add a comment instead.

Comment on attachment 585954 [details] [diff] [review] (Av1) Port bug 218142 ('onCompletedImage') PS: 'showImage()' is now 'viewMedia()'. SM code is +/- different than FF code, and I'm not touching that part...

I don't think we should do this at least until Bug 436483 is fixed. > Blocks: 715410 I don't see any direct dependencies?

(In reply to Philip Chee from comment #3) > > Blocks: 715410 > I don't see any direct dependencies? (Only that I had planned to work on bug 715410 after this one.)

Comment on attachment 585954 [details] [diff] [review] (Av1) Port bug 218142 ('onCompletedImage') Well, SeaMonkey's fix preceded Firefox; I don't know why they wanted to limit it to incomplete images only but apparently it makes sense to.

Neil, do you agree that I check this in right away, or should I wait for bug 436483 as Philip suggested?

(In reply to Serge Gautherie from comment #6) > should I wait for bug 436483 as Philip suggested? That's a good idea; we don't want to port broken behaviour.

This is either WORKSFORME or a DUP of Bug 47475

(In reply to Philip Chee from comment #8) > This is either WORKSFORME or a DUP of Bug 47475 [Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26.1] I don't think so (unless I am missing something): Bug 47475 would rather be the initial SeaMonkey bug Neil was thinking of in his comment 5. Current behavior (in SM browser) is still unconditional. Mxr search confirms that there was "no change".

(In reply to neil@parkwaycc.co.uk from comment #7) > (In reply to Serge Gautherie from comment #6) > > should I wait for bug 436483 as Philip suggested? > That's a good idea; we don't want to port broken behaviour. Whiteboard: "Landing depends on bug 436483 fix first" Bug 436483 (in "Core / Networking:HTTP") is now WONTFIX, see bug 436483 comment #7. Does this mean that this bug is WONTFIX too, or shall we implement broken behaviour anyway, or will some other solution have to be found?

(In reply to Tony Mechelynck from comment #10) > Bug 436483 (in "Core / Networking:HTTP") is now WONTFIX. > Does this mean that this bug is WONTFIX too, or shall we implement broken > behaviour anyway, or will some other solution have to be found? I don't think implementing broken behaviour is a good idea, since I've occasionally reloaded a partially loaded image, and if we take this patch then we wouldn't be able to do that, as due to the WONTFIX we wouldn't have an accurate way of detecting that, and taking the patch as-is would lead to a false negative in this case.