Thank you Travis, I am in complete agreement with you on this. You have a described a much better user story than I was able to express, and I hope that the firebug team (including jjb) will take this use-case when evaluating the effectiveness of the new model. I only wish the devteam was more receptive to their users, instead of assumptions about much it can outsmart the end-user in an attempt to be helpful...
jjj On Jul 3, 1:15 pm, travisa <[email protected]> wrote: > While activating Firebug and then refreshing the page to view requests > and responses will work on certain occasions, this is is not much of a > solution for content that varies upon refreshing. > > Troubleshooting a malfunctioning ad running at a low percentage share > of voice is now impossible with Firebug under the new activation > model. As content becomes increasingly dynamic online, debugging > issues via refreshing will become a remotely viable option. You simply > will need to have been recording from the start, user-initiation after > the fact will just not cut it. > > Please do not underestimate the size of the base of Firebug users that > need the plugin to be automatically recording on specific domains and > automatically disabled the rest of the time (or the inverse of this). > Firebug 1.4 and 1.5 (even with the bug fixes) are still useless for > this increasingly common purpose. > > We now need a Firebug 1.3 for Firefox 3.5 (or at least an extension > that brings back the legacy domain whitelist/blacklist activation > model). > > My apologies if this comes across as a bit harsh but this is honestly > the reality. I speak for many developers who have been feeling this > pain since updating to Firefox 3.5 and Firebug 1.4+. > > -Travis > > On Jul 3, 1:34 pm, Nicolas Hatier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > IMHO, with the latest bug fixes and enhancements (1.5X.0a8), the new > > activation model begins to be really usable and to make sense. > > > One further enhancement would be to keep the minimize state as it is > > currently and stop opening and minimizing spuriously... The > > minimize/un-minimize action should always be a manual one. > > > For instance, I have the "On for all pages" option set. I navigate to > > any url. I minimize Firebug. Then I click File/New on Firefox, and it > > opens a new window on my home page. Firebug is active (correct), but not > > minimized - the Firebug panel is shown (incorrect). Closing completely > > Firefox and opening it back will also show the Firebug panel, even if it > > was minimized before. I think that's not a wanted behavior. > > > Other example which shows a correct behavior: I still have "On for all > > pages" option set. I navigate to my dev site, and open the FIrebug > > panel. Then I type another URL, saywww.google.com. Firebug panel stays > > open (correct). I minimize it, then go back to my dev site. Firebug > > stays minimized (still correct). > > > NH > > > johnjbarton wrote: > > > > On Jul 2, 7:21 pm, sir_brizz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I'm just unsure what clarity was actually lost in the 1.3 model. If > > >> you had enabled Firebug for a domain, then it was on on that domain. > > >> You could have expanded this by introducing the bug lit/unlit design > > >> you have for 1.4 now to show whether Firebug was active on the page or > > >> not. Who cares what the panel is doing? If you want to know if Firebug > > >> is on, just look at the bug. ... > > > > The Firebug icon is orange when the optional panels Console/Script/Net > > > are operating. This is the same in Firebug 1.3 and 1.4. > > > >> As before, I realize the current model makes some sense, I just don't > > >> see it as a worthwhile change over what we had. As someone who heavily > > >> prefers the 1.2 design to this day, I would much prefer just being > > >> able to have firebug either always on or always off and then have > > >> domain settings for the opposite action to occur. > > > > Now you are reminding me how much time I've wasted on this stuff. > > > >> I realize all of this isn't going to go anywhere, the core development > > >> team is happy with the activation model regardless of what any > > >> individual person wants, so nothing is likely to change as far as how > > >> the model is functionally. > > > > I would not say "happy", more like "allowing deactivation was a waste > > > of time". In retrospect I think we should never have implemented > > > activation at all. Rather we should have just made Firebug "on", end > > > of story. If it makes using Firefox for your gmail impossible, sorry, > > > we do debuggers not email clients. That would have made 1.2 hugely > > > unpopular and cut the number of users by a large fraction and possibly > > > prevent Mozilla from contributing to the project. On the other hand, I > > > would been able to concentrate on things that make more difference to > > > debugging. > > > >> So roping this all back in to what can actually happen for the current > > >> design, the X is confusing in "On for all pages" mode. I understand > > >> that it isn't doing the blacklisting of the domain, though that might > > >> be a nice feature, but, in my opinion, the state of the panel itself > > >> (showing or hidden) should stay static across all pages when the > > >> option is set. > > > > Yes we could have On For All Pages obey the black list settings. But > > > I'm not sure that would be less confusing. > > > >> On another note, I don't really get the "Off for all pages" option. Is > > >> that for debugging? Or does it change your per-domain settings in some > > >> way? Because unchecking "On for all pages" should just revert to your > > >> original settings. > > > > Unchecking "On for all pages" stops whitelisting new pages. It does > > > not change any existing annotations. > > > "Off for all pages" clears the whitelist. So yes in fact it is a > > > debugging feature. > > > >> The thing I dislike most about 1.4 is that Activation is linked sooooo > > >> tightly to the panel displaying. It doesn't feel like these things are > > >> separate at all anymore, so it feels like it is "Panel showing, > > >> Firebug active. Panel not showing, Firebug inactive" (despite the fact > > >> that that is not quite how it works) and I hate that to extreme > > >> levels. > > > > "Panel not showing, Firebug active" is minimize. > > > Panel showing, Firebug inactive is not supported, correct. > > > > jjb --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
