Update user.js #583
Update user.js #583
Conversation
|
just a couple things I'd like to change ... 👖, 🐈 |
|
see #575 OP .. 1022 = inactive or remove (I'm fine with removing it)
|
|
the only reason why it could make sense to disable it IMO (assuming it even does disable session restore after crash!) would be if a tab manages to take down the whole browser you probably don't want to restore that tab |
|
1260: that's web breakage - if sha-1 is restricted, pages won't load .. web breaks. Just like not allowing DRM breaks video, video will not load. I know we can argue semantics here.
The rest looks fine on first glance. I still need to go thru [SETUP* and make sure we have things in the right places. end of 1st line if ok, but in body if the next comment specifically is about that. So yeah, those moves look ok as well |
|
1260 - no it's not. The default is to block sha1 and only allow them for local added roots ie redirecting traffic through fiddler, an Antivirus, etc. Our default basically just prevents traffic from being routed like that if the intermediary app is using a sha1 cert. So it's more a CHROME thing than WEB, IMHO |
So keep it, but make inactive? we can drop the [setup if inactive /* 1022: disable resuming session from crash
* Useful if repeated crashes on restore are caused by a malicious tab ***/
// user_pref("browser.sessionstore.resume_from_crash", false); |
|
OK, answer me this. If 1260 causes a problem, what does the end user experience? Is it a redirected page with a message? |
because it came up in some of those 400+ pref dumps and I think TB also still has that pref active. |
thats fine. Will need to add it to the deprecated sticky |
that implies that it does what we think it does. You're the one with the scratchpad to crash FF ... :) |
No need to add setup tag (and I am going to get those all out of headers). Recommendation for TC, IDK - it hasn't really been updated for like 6 months from memory - mostly lint and things. The issues are piling up. |
|
Can I do a little editing to undo a couple of things and push this thru. I'd like to address the others one by one - i think my comment about not wanting make a note/todo list before was ambiguous. I meant for a single change it wasn't worth opening an issue. |
AFAIK that pref alone does nothing if you don't also set a proxy, fe fiddler. So most people will never have a problem with that pref and people who use fiddler or similar should have no problem knowing where to look to make it work. (1200 = HTTPS, CERTS, etc) |
sure |
I mean currently due to needing to long-press to even have the option to use containers show up on |
|
I'll update the deprecated sticky |
Oh, i get ya. We can add one to the long press pref if you want. As for noticing it's on - users might notice them in right click contexts, and it will show in options as well. That should suffice |
|
maybe change |
|
edit: actually I think we can just remove the NOTE. Option 2 allows to use non-container and containerized tabs. 1 more reason to just add the TAG to the section title IMHO. |
|
^^ see edit:
|
who cares about a bunch of minor issues and feature requests not getting solved as long as the shit works? especially when we talk about such a useful extension! My own shitty extensions are heading the same way, except they're not nearly as useful!!! 😅 It is already recommended on the wiki though, so it doesn't matter anyway. |
|
[NOTE] kinda lends weight (while our active value is the best so as to not spring nasty surprises - if FF ever flip containers on, I bet they go for 2 as well). I like that we added a setup tag to draw attention to it (the setting as well as the fact we turned containers on). The other prefs make no difference. And, I want to get [setup tags against prefs. They don;t work with the real-time thingy if they are stuck in section headers. That doesn't mean we can't also have them in headers, but it creates duplicity. At the end of the day, I want users in the js and on the whizzy-do dactyl site, to be able to jump from pref to pref and make changes or troubleshoot. The less in section headers the better |
|
OK, I need to DL a copy and compare with my local master, then I'll start a new issue, or commandeer one, and add in all the things we haven't addressed from here |
Yeah I'm fine with it being recommended. Was just querying its status (I don't use it). From the outside looking in, I was just querying it's status. For all I know, it's stable AF. I'll defer to you and 🌎 since you gals use it. It's on the task list FYI |
things not in the PR:
network.auth.subresource-http-auth-allow(would need to add it to troubleshooter as well)