-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 975
Conversation
Pinned sites
Default sites
History sites (current sites object)
Bookmarks sites
Bookmark folder sites
General
Questions
Known issues
Tests
Possible fixes (check if this issues are fixed after done) |
docs/state.md
Outdated
@@ -236,7 +236,47 @@ AppStore | |||
'tabs.switch-to-new-tabs': boolean, // true if newly opened tabs should be focused immediately | |||
'tabs.tabs-per-page': number // number of tabs per tab page | |||
}, | |||
sites: { | |||
// TODO sort alphabetically |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sorted collections are not easily possible with Immutable.JS right? and we probably don't want to re-sort on each sites mutation
currently i'm working around this by keeping separate sorted lists of siteKeys & scores (redis-sorted-set) in memory, populated at program init and with each ADD/RE/MOVE _SITE event.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this TOD only means that I should reorder this new entities in this md
file when all properties are fixed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Regarding sort, I was thinking of creating simple sort object that would have siteKey and order key. This way we can have bookmarks and folders split, but still keep the order that we need for the bookmark toolbar. Something similar we use for tabs as well.
What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
re-sort on every sites mutation has been a source of serious perf issues, so as long as we don't do that it's okay.
i'm actually working on something similar for caching history and topsites. downside is the cache is available in the same process only.
it would be nice if there existed an Immutable.JS sorted map.
what's the timeline on this refactor? |
Timeline is probably start of the next week |
docs/state.md
Outdated
title: string | ||
} | ||
}, | ||
pinnedSites: { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that this can be removed and we only use tabs
for it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we need it
8d60b6c
to
1aa22fb
Compare
the pinned tab changes won't affect sync, but everything else does. i can help do the sync change |
app/sessionStore.js
Outdated
@@ -626,7 +628,8 @@ module.exports.defaultAppState = () => { | |||
pendingRecords: {} | |||
}, | |||
locationSiteKeysCache: undefined, | |||
sites: getTopSiteMap(), | |||
sites: getTopSiteMap(), // TODO remove |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what will happen to the top sites? currently they have siteTag DEFAULT so that they don't show up in history/autosuggest until they are actually visited
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I found out that we only use top sites in new tab, so top sites will be automatically added to the new tab top sites list inside the newTab
component. Top sites will not be part of the state anymore.
@diracdeltas thank you, will need some help with sync for sure. Right now I am still building the big picture, so probably tomorrow I will have cleaner image and path how to do everything. |
0ba3c00
to
f96e0b1
Compare
@ayumi how far are you with your fix? |
bdc93ce
to
28664c7
Compare
820542d
to
28b71b9
Compare
@luixxiul ok so there could be a problem with an upgrade process. Will take a look |
a87b20d
to
52ddddb
Compare
52ddddb
to
475c457
Compare
Auditors: Test Plan:
475c457
to
a77e9a8
Compare
Closing in favor of #10136, which is based on this repo and not on my fork. |
Submitter Checklist:
git rebase -i
to squash commits (if needed).Auditors: @bbondy @ayumi @diracdeltas @bsclifton @darkdh
Test Plan:
Reviewer Checklist:
Tests