Extensions which are disabled via policy are not showing up as greyed out in cros |
|||||||
Issue descriptionChrome Version: cros What steps will reproduce the problem? (1) Set ExtensionInstallBlacklist or ExtensionAllowedTypes to disable an extension. What is the expected result? Extension apps icons should be greyed out. What happens instead? Extension app icons look normal. This may be fixed when the blocking bug, 786061 is fixed.
,
Nov 27 2017
,
Nov 28 2017
This is still an issue. Regarding https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=786061#c42, util::IsAppLaunchable is only checking for specific disabled reasons. Also cc'ing Ben who might have more context.
,
Nov 28 2017
Sorry I don't have much context on this. Is the bug for extensions or apps?
,
Nov 28 2017
Just looked at the code in question and I do have some context. For some disable reasons (i.e. user disabled), launching the app is possible and will just re-enable it. So those apps are considered 'launchable'. Perhaps we should change it so instead of: launching == !(disabled for a set of reasons), it should be: launching == enabled or (disabled for a different set of reasons). Does that make sense?
,
Nov 28 2017
s/launching/launchable/
,
Dec 6 2017
Makes sense to me.
,
Dec 7 2017
Am happy to look into this, but can you give more info on how to reproduce / test? E.g. how do I set ExtensionAllowedTypes or an ExtensionInstallBlacklist?
,
Dec 7 2017
Here are steps for enabling a policy. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HiSuCNESc6tOQxx2QdmYATy4mT_e1zUaocmqUvJyWeU/edit#
,
Dec 8 2017
Wow, that's a five page document. I don't even know where the steps I'm meant to follow begin. The fix for this is very simple (see comments #3 and #5) and I'd be happy to review it if someone from the enterprise team does it.
,
Oct 26
,
Dec 13
|
|||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||
Comment 1 by newcomer@chromium.org
, Nov 21 2017