New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like █ or █) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 746109 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: Untriaged
Owner: ----
Cc:
█ imch...@chromium.org
rockot@google.com
taku...@chromium.org
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 3
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

IDR_URL_MOJO_JS and IDR_MOJO_URL_MOJOM_JS both refer to the same url.mojom.js

Project Member Reported by thestig@chromium.org, Jul 19 2017 
I noticed we have two resource identifiers:

IDR_URL_MOJO_JS in chrome/browser/browser_resources.grd and IDR_MOJO_URL_MOJOM_JS in chrome/renderer/resources/renderer_resources.grd, both referring to url.mojom.js.

Similarly we have IDR_ORIGIN_MOJO_JS and IDR_ORIGIN_MOJOM_JS referring to origin.mojom.js.

Does this mean we are including two copies of {origin,url}.mojom.js? Should we consolidate them?

Comment 1 by roc...@chromium.org, Jul 19 2017 

I think this will come naturally out of conversions to new mojo JS bindings.

IDR_URL_MOJO_JS is in the browser resource bundle because of the way old JS
bindings are used in WebUI (only for site engagement now).

IDR_MOJO_URL_MOJOM_JS is in the renderer resource bundle instead. When the
site engagement WebUI is ported to the new bindings, all uses of
IDR_URL_MOJO_JS will disappear.

Comment 2 by taku...@chromium.org, Jul 19 2017

Cc: imch...@chromium.org

Comment 3 by roc...@chromium.org, Oct 17

Cc: -roc...@chromium.org rockot@google.com
►

Sign in to add a comment