[Ext] Classic Theme Restorer

[juozas]

Hi, after upgrading to firefox Version 50 (tested on CTR version 1.6.0 beta1, beta2) I found a few problems.

1. The default load indicator color changed to blue. It become a bit annoying since I've been used to old one which was red/orangy look. Screenshots below.


New load indicator


The old one (Screenshot taked from a virtual machine)

2. The plugin indicator looks weird, looked different before. Is it possible to hide it or fix it by moving it to right place? The current appearance does not look good to my eyes. Screenshots:


New buggy look


the old look

p.s. the flash loads on yt as long I change the UA of firefox to lower verion on that site.

[Aris]

Hi, after upgrading to firefox Version 50 (tested on CTR version 1.6.0 beta1, beta2) I found a few problems.

1. The default load indicator color changed to blue. It become a bit annoying since I've been used to old one which was red/orangy look. Screenshots below.

http://i.imgur.com/0Cr2ZVi.png
New load indicator

http://i.imgur.com/hpvnXHd.png
The old one (Screenshot taked from a virtual machine)

2. The plugin indicator looks weird, looked different before. Is it possible to hide it or fix it by moving it to right place? The current appearance does not look good to my eyes. Screenshots:

http://i.imgur.com/td8meIi.png
New buggy look

http://i.imgur.com/OpyWz8F.png
the old look

p.s. the flash loads on yt as long I change the UA of firefox to lower verion on that site.

1. I can add the orange loading indicator as an option on next update.

2. In Fx50 almost everything inside identity box changed, you can not return to the old look without breaking something.

There are however ways to achieve this for your case:

- Save this image to your hdd:


- Add code to Stylish and point to image file within code.

Code: Select all

/*AGENT_SHEET*/
#notification-popup-box {
  -moz-box-ordinal-group: 0 !important;
  background: url("file:///C:/image/urlbar-arrow.png") center right no-repeat !important;
  margin-left: -12px !important;
  margin-right: 8px !important;
  padding-left: 2px !important;
  padding-right: 8px !important;
}

This was only tested with normal button mode and movable back/forward buttons on Windows. Adjusting values for other cases should be possible.

[happysurf]

Aris, did you read this article?
Firefox will only support WebExtensions by the end of 2017.
http://www.ghacks.net/2016/11/24/firefo ... d-of-2017/

[Virtual_ManPL]

Read it by first hand - https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2016/11/23/add-ons-in-2017/, not from some external "source"
and looks like Mozilla want to loose more and more user base with their changes and ideas...

[Aris]

According to that list on ghacks Fx 57 beta and 52.4 ESR still support non-WE add-ons, right? While they will somehow block non-WE add-ons on Fx 57 final, doing this on FX 52.5 ESR seems very stupid and illogical as there is no difference between ESR builds of one branch, if you don't count the security fixes.

Now its real, CTR as we know it (and all my other Firefox add-ons), will be discontinued by the end of 2017. We still have no way to change Firefox ui using WebExtensions and all my add-ons are about ui modifications.
Seems like its almost time to get used to another browser.

[streetwolf]

According to that list on ghacks Fx 57 beta and 52.4 ESR still support non-WE add-ons, right? While they will somehow block non-WE add-ons on Fx 57 final, doing this on FX 52.5 ESR seems very stupid and illogical as there is no difference between ESR builds of one branch, if you don't count the security fixes.

Now its real, CTR as we know it (and all my other Firefox add-ons), will be discontinued by the end of 2017. We still have no way to change Firefox ui using WebExtensions and all my add-ons are about ui modifications.
Seems like its almost time to get used to another browser.

Have you spoken to Mozilla about all of this? I know a few other developers who expressed the same concerns as you over not being able to change the UI. I think they asked for an API or something that would address this.

[Aris]

There are plans for this, but still nothing "ready" to use or even to test.

https://github.com/nt1m/WebExtensions-T ... /issues/1/
https://github.com/nt1m/WebExtensions-T ... API/issues
https://github.com/mozilla/firefox-them ... ster/notes

IMO there should be something that works and at least equals what Firefox can do now, before dropping xul support, but.... Mozilla devs did always, what they want.

[itisomegakai]

There are plans for this, but still nothing "ready" to use or even to test.

https://github.com/nt1m/WebExtensions-T ... /issues/1/
https://github.com/nt1m/WebExtensions-T ... API/issues
https://github.com/mozilla/firefox-them ... ster/notes

IMO there should be something that works and at least equals what Firefox can do now, before dropping xul support, but.... Mozilla devs did always, what they want.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1306671

why depreciate a feature of Firefox which is far superior that what others offer?
They should have taken it and improved it.
Aris can you file a bug requesting other apis which your addons might need?

New APIs and capabilities will be introduced throughout the year according to Mozilla to add missing capabilities to the WebExtensions system of Firefox.

Throughout the year we’ll expand the set of APIs available, add capabilities to Firefox that don’t yet exist in other browsers, and put more WebExtensions in front of users.

Maybe they do this or maybe not,
This move affects the add-ons that made Firefox. Sure, there are other parts of the browser that appeal to users, but for many, it was Firefox's add-on system that won them over.

[streetwolf]

Why exactly does Mozilla not want you to change the UI? Is it because Google Chrome doesn't do it? From a support perspective I can see that companies want a fairly consistent interface among all users so that they can support the product better. Even add-ons in general make problems harder to diagnose. That's why the first thing that is asked is have you tried Fx in safe-mode and/or with a new profile?

Does the way Google Chrome handle things an official standard by some standards consortium? Why can't Fx create API's to allow customization of the UI the same s XUL does it? Is XUL something that is going the way of the dinosaurs by decree?

Arguably what makes Fx great is it's customization. Why on earth do they want to take this away just to be like Google Chrome?

[WildcatRay]

@streetwolf,

I would not be surprised that at least one reason for the direction Firefox is moving is a reaction to surveys that say many Firefox users simply did not use any 3rd party themes and/or extensions. I also would not be surprised that many developers push internally to do away with such high amounts of user customization for the convenience of not having to deal with user complains that result from extensions and not the browser per se.

It should also be noted here that, if anything, IE, Chrome, Opera, etc., added (limited) user customization likely in response to attract Firefox users.

My guess is that there is a lack of a driving force inside Mozilla to keep Firefox Firefox, a highly customizable web browser.

[marty60]

Where does it say that 52.5esr will be changed? According to this addons should continue to work throughout 52esr, although it wouldn't really be all that much more but it's better than nothing:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/2017

[Aris]

@itisomegakai
I guess there were already many discussions about deprecation of features and nothing so far could stop Mozilla from moving in that direction. Complaining and/or offering proper reasons, why moves like that are bad/wrong, did not change anything in the past and won't either in the future. I gave up doing that.

No idea what API to request. On Github, where they gathered info from developers, I wrote having ways to move/create/change/modify tabs, buttons, toolbars, content/items orders etc. would be great.
My hopes are still very low and I don't believe Firefox 57 will offer something powerful and customizable (compared to what we have now) by then. I hope I'm wrong

@streetwolf
Mozillas excuse for removing features is and always was something like "most users do not need/use that (see Chrome)". Additionally they want to have more control to reduce issue reports and browser/profile corruption.
Looking at everything current add-ons can break once they get older and not updated constantly, I'm not surprised (see Foxtab for example).

@marty60
You are of course right, Fx ESR 52 will support XUL add-ons until Fx ESR 59(.2) replaces Fx ESR 52(.9) (~2018/Q2).

[notonymous]

We still have no way to change Firefox ui using WebExtensions and all my add-ons are about ui modifications.
Seems like its almost time to get used to another browser.

Just out of curiosity, how much of CTR is based on CSS modifications (and, presumably, won't be affected by the introduction of WE) and how much is "code" requiring an appropriate WE API?

[max2]

@itisomegakai
I guess there were already many discussions about deprecation of features and nothing so far could stop Mozilla from moving in that direction. Complaining and/or offering proper reasons, why moves like that are bad/wrong, did not change anything in the past and won't either in the future. I gave up doing that.

No idea what API to request. On Github, where they gathered info from developers, I wrote having ways to move/create/change/modify tabs, buttons, toolbars, content/items orders etc. would be great.
My hopes are still very low and I don't believe Firefox 57 will offer something powerful and customizable (compared to what we have now) by then. I hope I'm wrong

@streetwolf
Mozillas excuse for removing features is and always was something like "most users do not need/use that (see Chrome)". Additionally they want to have more control to reduce issue reports and browser/profile corruption.
Looking at everything current add-ons can break once they get older and not updated constantly, I'm not surprised (see Foxtab for example).

@marty60
You are of course right, Fx ESR 52 will support XUL add-ons until Fx ESR 59(.2) replaces Fx ESR 52(.9) (~2018/Q2).

So if this happens what are our options ?

Stay with a old version of Firefox , change to Firefox ESR, go to WaterFox, or Palemoon ?

[Aris]

...

Just out of curiosity, how much of CTR is based on CSS modifications (and, presumably, won't be affected by the introduction of WE) and how much is "code" requiring an appropriate WE API?

At the current stage of WE-API only these CTR options would work in a WE:
- General UI > P1 > New Tab page (about:newtab): alternative appearance
- General UI > P1 > Start page (about:home): hide snippets
- General UI > P1 > General 'about:' pages: alternative appearance
- General UI > P2 > Classic image appearance on white background
- Options page/window > all excl. window settings (not sure about those yet)
- Add-ons Manager > all excl. add-on version option (not sure about that one yet)
- switches for default about:config preferences

Not sure such a CTR update is worth releasing.

...

So if this happens what are our options ?

Stay with a old version of Firefox , change to Firefox ESR, go to WaterFox, or Palemoon ?

I would not recommend to stay with outdated Fx versions. They will lack security fixes.

- Fx ESR will be an option till 2018/Q2 (maybe a bit longer).
- Seamonkey could be an alternative.
- Palemoon will most likely be a good alternative. PM devs started to make their own thing years ago.
- Not sure how Waterfox, Cyberfox and other forks will handle Firefox main code movement to WE as they are very close to browsers default code. Only their devs can tell.
- There is always the option to switch to another non-Mozilla/Fx-fork browser like Vivaldi, Opera or Chrome.