-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
Closed
Labels
Description
I have a set of rules to modify titles and works great!
I wanted to change the icon for a subset of those tabs...
Currently only the first rule is matched, so I would have to:
- duplicate all the rules
- add filters for the subsets URL fragments
- do the exact same title modification + add icon
Example:
- modify a bunch or github URLs
- now the same but add a custom icon for my personal repos
...
There might be a simpler solution?
- I know that if this is changed carelessly then other use cases that exploit the current behavior would break tho.
- In my example I need to be able to ADD extra customization to the tab (icon) not OVERRIDE currently set by prior rules (title)
- But maybe some users explicitly want their general rule with default stuff to persist. Which IMO seems like a less common case?
Anyway, proposed solutions:
- Add another toggle to the rule to make it "always-checked" meaning that it is always checked even if a prior rule has being matched and in that case apply its modifications, only non-default fields (not fields already modified by other rule)
- Could be placed inside Advanced submenu
- EXTRA: There could also be a toggle for "force" or "override" which allows even overriding fields: this has the same effect as moving the rule to the very top but this seems more intuitive e.g. important rules or very specific rules like the manually named tabs
- Alternatively it could be a toggle to mark a rule "non-exclusive" meaning that other posterior rules may still modify the tab, but again, only non-default fields can be later modified
- Make rules fields have a explicit
NOT-SETvalue different fromDEFAULTe.g. title already has it{title}. Then all rules could be "non-exclusive":- Posterior matched rules can edit any
NOT-SETfield. - This seems to overcome the potential change in current behavior: simply set the rule to
DEFAULTand no other rule can edit it (the user would have to manually change it toNOT-SET) - But here the toggles would also require a
NOT-SETstate to comply, which seems weird. IMO here makes more sense to let posterior rules SET them (but not UN-SET) them e.g. making a tab "Pinned" is more suited for more specific rules like my use case only adding a custom icon.
- Posterior matched rules can edit any