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

Easier "runtime/on-demand" pref change support #720

Closed
gregglind opened this issue Dec 30, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

Easier "runtime/on-demand" pref change support #720

gregglind opened this issue Dec 30, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@gregglind
Copy link

Is this a bug or feature request?

feature

What is the current behavior?

The easiest way to get prefs into the firefox startup is to clone a profile and modify prefs.js or friends.

What is the expected or desired behavior?

web-ext --prefs some.json|somePrefs.js --prefs someOther.json which would be multicallable and applicable in right to left order. Each of which is json or in the usual userPrefs.js sort of form.

justification

  • Especially during development, having prefs control some aspects of an addons behaviour is useful, such "theaddon.demoMode=true" or Logging prefs, or "don't phone home" and many other cases.
  • it should be EASY to override "just a few" prefs, without having to go through all the hassle of profile creation and copying.

Simplificiations / Alternatives

  • only allow json

Prior art

  • cfx, jpm
  • shield does an enhanced form, where it has special shorthands for "the prefs tree for this addon"
@gregglind gregglind changed the title support --prefs cli argument Easier "runtime/on-demand" pref change support Dec 30, 2016
@rpl
Copy link
Member

rpl commented Dec 30, 2016

@gregglind we recently introduced a similar feature in #658 :

web-ext run --pref "a.custom.pref.name=value" --pref "othe.custom.pref.name=value"

it is not exactly the same as the one described above, mostly because it would be tedious to pass many customized preferences (but it could be easier when once we have added the support for a user-level and project-level config file as part of #176).

How it sounds to you?

If #658 and #176 are not enough to solve this issue, we will be absolutely more than happy to discuss about what is missing and how we can achieve it.

@kumar303
Copy link
Contributor

kumar303 commented Jan 5, 2017

I think #658, #176, and #123 will address this. Feel free to let me know if I'm missing something.

@kumar303 kumar303 closed this as completed Jan 5, 2017
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

3 participants