Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Issues which must be addressed prior to the next release (1.46?, 2.00?) #1195

Closed
smblott-github opened this issue Oct 26, 2014 · 8 comments
Closed

Comments

@smblott-github
Copy link
Collaborator

Chrome-store installs and sessions API

See discussion in #1166.

(Edit: We need to verify that adding a dependency on a recently-released chrome extension API (sessions) doesn't break chrome-store installations on older chrome versions.)

More edit:

@smblott-github smblott-github changed the title Verify Chrome Store issue discussed in #1166 Issues which must be addressed prior to the next release (1.46?, 2.00?) Nov 1, 2014
@smblott-github
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Edit 2014/11/12: This is resolved in #1239 -- no favicons.

Favicons in vomnibar

Prior to the next release, we must do one of the following:

@smblott-github
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The exclusion-rules section of the options page currently looks like this:

snapcrop

This style is a change from the established vimium option style, which is configuration by flat text area.

We need to either:

  • Make a positive decision to go with this style.
  • Revert to a flat text area.

@deiga
Copy link
Contributor

deiga commented Nov 3, 2014

This stile looks good to me, but does this allow for combinations to pass through? (f.ex. ctrl+d)

@smblott-github
Copy link
Collaborator Author

does this allow for combinations to pass through?

This is not (yet) implemented. It would be nice to have for the next release, but is not (in my view) a show stopper.

@mrmr1993
Copy link
Contributor

mrmr1993 commented Nov 3, 2014

I vote for text-based.

Since we still have time until release, I'd like to work on the idea in #1188 (any more feedback is much appreciated!), which should make passkeys largely redundant anyway.

@deiga
Copy link
Contributor

deiga commented Nov 3, 2014

@mrmr1993 after some consideration I do favor the way #1188 would change the whole thing

@philc
Copy link
Owner

philc commented Nov 11, 2014

Why don't we create separate issues for each of these, and give them a label of "release blocker" or "next-release"?

@smblott-github
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closing. The most critical issue here is now its own issue: #1241.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants