The purpose of this pull request is only to illustrate the differences between the Firefox implementation and the Chrome implementation so is clear what the #71 pull request is doing.
The changes generated here were achieved by replacing the files on the chrome folder with the files on firefox folder.
Theses are the differences and changes:
chrome/mainChat/chat.css > Two spacing issues and one extra rule. On the other pull request this rule was kept for both browsers
chrome/mainChat/chat.js > The namespace used to call extension specific code is different for Chrome and Firefox, but Firefox is also compatible with the chrome namespace. Another difference is that for chrome, the sync storage was used instead of local, but for some reason when I was testing the code on Firefox, calling the sync storage always returned and empty object. I think this may be caused by different implementations (e.g. how it is handles the case when the user don't have an account linked to the browser) but changing it to the local storage works for both browsers
chrome/manifest.json > The chrome manifest had an option page with the non-standard options_page key name. This was changed to "options_ui": { "page": "optionsPage/options.html" } for both browsers. The browser_action icon was changed to an object containing the different size images for both browsers, and the name key renamed to default_title. The Chrome version had an extra option called externally_connectable, used to specify which pages can connect to the runtime and send messages, but this functionality is not used on the extension so it was removed
chrome/optionsPage/options.css > One spacing issue and some extra rules on the Firefox css. All the rules were kept for both browsers
chrome/optionsPage/options.html > An extra <br> and some spaces. The Firefox version was kept
chrome/optionsPage/options.js > Same as chrome/mainChat/chat.js. Namespace and sync -> local
Don't merge
The purpose of this pull request is only to illustrate the differences between the Firefox implementation and the Chrome implementation so is clear what the #71 pull request is doing.
The changes generated here were achieved by replacing the files on the
chromefolder with the files onfirefoxfolder.Theses are the differences and changes:
chrome/mainChat/chat.css> Two spacing issues and one extra rule. On the other pull request this rule was kept for both browserschrome/mainChat/chat.js> The namespace used to call extension specific code is different for Chrome and Firefox, but Firefox is also compatible with the chrome namespace. Another difference is that for chrome, thesyncstorage was used instead oflocal, but for some reason when I was testing the code on Firefox, calling the sync storage always returned and empty object. I think this may be caused by different implementations (e.g. how it is handles the case when the user don't have an account linked to the browser) but changing it to thelocalstorage works for both browserschrome/manifest.json> The chrome manifest had an option page with the non-standardoptions_pagekey name. This was changed to"options_ui": { "page": "optionsPage/options.html" }for both browsers. Thebrowser_actionicon was changed to an object containing the different size images for both browsers, and thenamekey renamed todefault_title. The Chrome version had an extra option calledexternally_connectable, used to specify which pages can connect to the runtime and send messages, but this functionality is not used on the extension so it was removedchrome/optionsPage/options.css> One spacing issue and some extra rules on the Firefox css. All the rules were kept for both browserschrome/optionsPage/options.html> An extra<br>and some spaces. The Firefox version was keptchrome/optionsPage/options.js> Same aschrome/mainChat/chat.js. Namespace andsync->local