sir_brizz wrote:
> Personally, I just find the new method inconvenient in almost every
> aspect. It feels like, intentional or not, that FireBug is rewritten
> from scratch every time a new version comes out because features are
> drastically changed between versions as opposed to bugs being fixed
> and new features added.
>
> I wasn't a fan of the activation model in 1.3 but I grew into it over
> time. The current activation model takes that one step further than
> the 1.3 model away from the 1.2 model.
>
> In 1.2, I appreciated being able to have Firebug always on and disable
> it on specific sites. I like to have it available all the time in case
> I want to use it, none of this refreshing the page repeatedly to get
> what I want. This is my preferred activation model.
>
> In 1.3, my typical use-case was simply to whitelist any domains I was
> going to use it on often as soon as I went to them. This way I never
> had to wonder if, for example, Firebug was running on ANY of my
> development sites (all on the same domain). With only slight
> modifications, this activation model could have easily been made to
> work like 1.2 for users who were interested. After one moment of
> annoyance, I could have all of my sites functioning with Firebug with
> NO ACTION from me.
>
> In 1.4, while the functionality makes sense, I have to go through a
> lot of steps (AND avoid clicking the X........) to get Firebug up on a
> site, and it seems file or folder based or something. On first run, I
> have to:
>
> *) Right click Firebug icon
> *) Enable all panels
> *) Click to open Firebug
> *) Refresh the page
> *) Check things
> *) Minimize Firebug (don't click the X or you have to start all over!)
> *) Come back to the page at some later time and again avoid clicking
> the X during use, which disables Firebug and messes up the domain
> setting again.
>
> This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Previously, You go to your
> domain, click to open firebug, check all the boxes and the button and
> you never have to worry about messing that setting up again unless you
> do it intentionally.
>
> In my opinion, all of this could be avoided by having two modes for
> Firebug, whitelist mode and blacklist mode. In whitelist mode, Firebug
> is always disabled and you can enable it for specific domains. In
> blacklist mode it is always enabled and you can disable it for
> specific domains. There is no worrying about the bug icon, clicking
> the wrong buttons, or anything and setup can default to whichever
> makes most sense.
>
> I'm positive that eventually I'll have just rolled the new activation
> model in to my workflow, it's just annoying to have to do so when the
> old model worked just fine for me. I used many of the 1.4 alphas and
> saw complaints about the new activation model come in all the time,
> but they are always passed off as either the activation model having
> bugs or the user just using it wrong. I don't recall anyone
> complaining this much about the model in 1.3, because, whether you
> preferred it or not, it was intuitive and easy. The new model, so far,
> just isn't (or, especially, isn't as intuitive as the old model).
>
> On Jul 1, 12:14 am, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote:
>   
>> On Jun 30, 9:30 pm, MorningZ <[email protected]> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>     
>>> I'm in Visual Studio, i built my project, and choose the file to view
>>> in browser
>>>       
>>> http://i40.tinypic.com/2cpx8uo.jpg
>>>       
>> Ok right away I see your problem. Does Visual Studio generates as a
>> new file name every time? And it's not a web site so you don't even
>> have a domain correct?
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>>> So Flock (version 2.5) opens up, Firebug (i'm on 1.4.0b3) comes up
>>> disabled.....
>>>       
>>> http://i42.tinypic.com/30mokmp.jpg(andyeah, that is the annoying
>>> part)
>>>       
>> Just to help the communications, we would not call that "up disabled".
>> Rather we would say "closed" (because you have no UI) and "suspended"
>> because the icon is gray.
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>>> So now i have to click the bug to "activate", which also opens the
>>> panel, which i am running 3 monitors but not very high resolution so i
>>> can't actually read/use what i am working on because the panel is
>>> hogging up the viewport
>>>       
>>> http://i43.tinypic.com/27yvpnb.jpg
>>>       
>> If you had ever done this in the past for that URL, Firebug would
>> already be active.
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>>> So now I have to make another click to "undock", and then drag it to
>>> another monitor it just so i can read/use the web page
>>>       
>>> http://i44.tinypic.com/2885b9j.jpg
>>>       
>> I like "undock" but we call it "detach".  If you had been detached
>> before, you would stay detached.
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Sure, that simple example may sound like "well, it's just a few
>>> clicks", but as a professional developer, I am having to do that a lot
>>> of times over and over and over on a given 12 hour workday...... and i
>>> am closing and opening windows all the time (as that first screenshot
>>> causes a new page/tab to open)
>>>       
>> I do not consider this sequence you describe to be trivial. (Sounds a
>> lot like what I have to do to develop Firebug tho ;-).
>>
>>     
>>> You all are totally hung up that this new "activation" mode is the way
>>> to go....
>>>       
>> From what I can see in your information so far, the issue here is that
>> Visual Studio is generating file names. If so, then the domain-name
>> white/black list thing has nothing to do with this since you don't
>> even have a domain name.
>>
>> I'm not hung up on the new activation model. Rather I think it's a
>> great solution for the vast majority of users. But Firebug is used by
>> lots and lots of people in lots and lots of ways. So it's not possible
>> to anticipate all the cases.  As a practical matter, I am personally
>> not going to re-work the activation model. I am willing to make
>> adjustments and to help extension developers.  But first let's really
>> understand what is going on in your case.
>>
>> jjb
>>     
> >
>
>   
+1

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to