Skip to content
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

Fix regressions affecting both the 'pagemode' hash parameter and certain 'namedaction' types (PR 5971) #6314

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 7, 2015
Merged

Conversation

Snuffleupagus
Copy link
Collaborator

Please refer to the individual commit messages.

Both these regressions are from PR #5971.

…store the functionality

This regressed in 0ef6212.

Since the 'pagemode' hash parameter requires certain viewer functionality (e.g. thumbnails and an outline) in order to work, it seemed reasonable to move the functionality from `pdf_link_service.js` into `viewer.js`.
Similar to `namedaction`, this patch makes use of an event to forward the 'pagemode' parameter.
@Snuffleupagus
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I removed the unnecessary newline; I also made a couple of small improvements in the first commit, e.g. better code structure (and added comments) for the bookmarks/outline case.

/botio-windows preview

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented Aug 7, 2015

From: Bot.io (Windows)


Received

Command cmd_preview from @Snuffleupagus received. Current queue size: 0

Live output at: http://107.22.172.223:8877/c137f33485137fc/output.txt

timvandermeij added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 7, 2015
Fix regressions affecting both the 'pagemode' hash parameter and certain 'namedaction' types (PR 5971)
@timvandermeij timvandermeij merged commit de979f1 into mozilla:master Aug 7, 2015
@timvandermeij
Copy link
Contributor

Nice patch, thank you!

@Snuffleupagus Snuffleupagus deleted the pagemode-regression branch August 7, 2015 21:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants