Small conflict between Lull the Tabs & Tab Mix Plus

[VLMin]

I have been a TMP user for years and just discovered Lull the Tabs. Love it, with one issue. It seems that Lull the Tabs overrides the TMP settings in Options > Display > Tabs > Customize Styles. I imagine Lull might create a class of tabs outside the TMP set (current, unloaded, unread, other) and therefore not recognized by TMP. Perhaps when Lull unloads a tab, it could set the status "unloaded", as recognized by TMP. ??? That's what I expected. I realize there may be a similar conflict involving other tab extensions that I don't happen to use, so that my suggested solution may not be the best course.

I wonder whether the developers might be willing to put their heads together and resolve this small but quite visible conflict.

Thank you kindly,

[doofy]

I've used TMP for maybe 15 yrs and I reckon it doesn't play nice with any other extension that requires access to tab functionality.

[JustOff]

It seems that Lull the Tabs overrides the TMP settings in Options > Display > Tabs > Customize Styles. I imagine Lull might create a class of tabs outside the TMP set (current, unloaded, unread, other) and therefore not recognized by TMP.

No, it does not, and TMP successfully recognizes and applies its custom styles to unloaded tabs.

The only thing LTT adds is {opacity: .5;}, but you can override it back to 1 using userChrome.css:

Code: Select all

.tabbrowser-tab[pending=true],
menuitem.alltabs-item[pending=true] {
  opacity: 1 !important;
}

[VLMin]

Thank you. Would you consider making opacity an options setting? I see no reason to compel people, with varying eyesight, preferences, and comfortableness doing such editing first to find this exchange, then to edit userChrome.css.

Truly, not everyone feels comfortable doing such editing.

Thank you for your consideration.

[JustOff]

Would you consider making opacity an options setting?

Perhaps, but only if there will be many people who are not happy with the defaults, which I think already provide optimal usability.

[VLMin]

Thank you for your kind response.

Perhaps I did not communicate my point clearly — I believe the question is, optimal for whom? I assure you that my eyesight is unlike your eyesight, and so on. Give people choice, particularly when it comes to visual artifacts; none of us can ever know what works best for this or that other person.

IMO, an end-user should not be asked to modify a config file except under fairly rare conditions, which this is not, because to do so excludes people. Better to include, I think.

Is the setting available in about:config? Some may be more comfortable working there than modifying code. Just a thought, part way to an options setting anyway.

Best to you,