I am interested why you don't think the status bar icon is a good solution to minimize/unminimze.
jjb On Jul 8, 11:06 am, sir_brizz <[email protected]> wrote: > I like how you just cast off our disappointment with the way this > feature was implemented. o_O I took issue with the new activation > model months ago, you could have read the signs back then when people > agreed with me. > > I'll be happy if the button order is changed so that the minimize > button is in the corner. As someone else pointed out here or another > thread, this is a tool for developers. The likelihood that someone > developing on a site is going to be enabling and disabling firebug a > million miles a minute is minute. The more likely scenario is that > they will want it on for a domain and then forget about it (minimize > it) until something happens that causes them to need to interact with > it. > > Not only was this a break from the earlier functionality of Firebug, > it's also moving functionality that is not always wanted or needed > into a prime location for accidental clicking. > > Anyway, the firebug team could easily avoid this by either allowing > extension hooks into the location/format/form of those three buttons, > or simply having an option that moves the "close and disable" button > somewhere else or removes it entirely. > > On Jul 8, 10:47 am, Rob Campbell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Rako, further obfuscation of JS code will never be a feature of > > Firebug. Most minimized JS is already quite obfuscated and, if > > anything, we'll produce a mechanism to display it more legibly, either > > by extension or with a feature. > > > As for the Off vs [X] button, I really feel this was a bit of a wasted > > effort and a discussion that blew the issue out of proportion. Now > > we've implemented this change to appease a noisy few. Most users will > > learn that the [X] button means "Close / Off" after they've used it. > > It behaves similarly to how you'd expect a close button to work in any > > other area of Firefox or the OS. I, for one, will be glad to see the > > "Off" label go away as soon as possible. > > > On Jul 7, 3:33 pm, Rako <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I do not rant. > > > I simply explain why is this extension/modification to/of the > > > activation needed. > > > Perhaps my reasoning offends you (are you one of the reverse- > > > engineers?), but it is not going to change my reasoning. > > > > On Jul 7, 12:34 pm, alfonsoml <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 7, 8:32 am, Rako <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I agree with all you say, but what annoys me, are the requests for new > > > > > features in FB to enable reverse engineering. > > > > > Then place your rants in those threads. > > > > This is already too heated, please, don't mix unrelated things. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
