Opened 7 years ago

Closed 7 years ago

#5487 closed defect (fixed)

XUL modal dialogs are not supported

Reported by: kevinprt Owned by: erikos
Priority: blocker Milestone: Update.1
Component: browse-activity Version: Build 650
Keywords: Gmail Hotmail popups alerts review? Cc: tomeu, erikos, marco
Blocked By: Blocking: #5534
Deployments affected: Action Needed:
Verified: no

Description

Gmail has an alert if send button is pushed and subject line is empty. XO doesn't show the alert (popup), therefore it fails to send. The reason is not apparent to the user.

Similiar problem in hotmail when managing folders. Deleting a folder normally shows an alert, however it doesn't appear when using XO. Not apparent to user, so it doesn't delete folder.

Attachments (1)

xuldialogs.patch (1.9 KB) - added by marco 7 years ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (13)

comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by tomeu

  • Cc tomeu added

If the missing popups are really alerts (javascript alert() or confirm()), then we need to first add support for modal alerts in sugar and then implement the required xpcom interface based on that.

A simpler workaround could be considered if needed, though.

comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by marco

  • Keywords Update.1? added
  • Priority changed from normal to high

Ouch, we need support for XUL dialogs. I guess it went lost in the popups handling refactoring.

Jim, I think it's important to get this for Update.1, there are a lot of cases where xulrunner is popping up dialogs. It should not be hard to fix.

comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by marco

  • Summary changed from Alerts (popups) don't show in Gmail and Hotmail, therefore prevents certain actions to XUL modal dialogs are not supported

comment:4 Changed 7 years ago by jg

  • Milestone changed from Never Assigned to Update.1

comment:5 Changed 7 years ago by dlang

this also affects dialogs asking for passwords or to allow unverified SSL certs

Changed 7 years ago by marco

comment:6 Changed 7 years ago by marco

  • Keywords review? added; Update.1? removed

Simple implementation, it's not perfect but it should work well enough for Update.1.

comment:7 Changed 7 years ago by marco

Should be in the next joyride.

comment:8 Changed 7 years ago by cscott

  • Blocking 5534 added

(In #5534) I'm reopening, because this should be verified independently of 5487. This is what the 'blocked by' field is for.

comment:9 Changed 7 years ago by marco

  • Priority changed from high to blocker

comment:10 Changed 7 years ago by erikos

  • Cc erikos marco added
  • Owner changed from erikos to ApprovalForUpdate

Went into Web-82.xo (in marco's public rpm repo) which i tested as working (about:config).

comment:11 Changed 7 years ago by marco

  • Owner changed from ApprovalForUpdate to erikos

Approved by me, build inclusion tracked by #5668

comment:12 Changed 7 years ago by marco

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from new to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.