-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 188
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
Disable/Re-enable UI is confusing #2462
Comments
Yes, I implemented this way replicating how ublock works, where to there is no direct way of changing the scope of a disable while already disabled - need to re-enable it and then re-disable choosing the spec. I agree its confusing, will implement it. |
The issue of changing this implementation, is that ublock doesn't have a property to distinguish if the current "trusted pages" hit is coming from a page-specific scope, or a domain specific scope. And since we don't have this information from the popupData, we cant set which of the scopes is the current active one. I can implement this distinction, but it will require some changes in uBO's code in the netFilteringSwitch, to return some extra properties so it can be displayed in the UI. |
Let's first answer the question of whether we can re-enable a site/domain after disabling (and whether this is intuitive)? Please test/document @mneunomne I'm not sure switching scope is even necessary |
This has now been fixed #2516 Closing |
As discussed, lets change the text on the 3 buttons at menu bottom: active: [ active*, strict, disable ]
|
v3.18.0
Disable UI is confusing: not clear after clicking
disable
whether one needs to click again ondomain
to make the disable active.I think a better solution might be to always pop-up the page or domain option without any preselection. Then the user must select one or the other, which causes the pop-up to close
There also seems to be no way (at least sometimes) to un-disable a site/domain (see image below, where clicking on
disable
for the already disabled site does nothing. How is this supposed to work ?See also #2453
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: