Background page load fail bug fix release note

[rebloor]

Description

Adds a release note describing the fix of a bug that resulted in background pages failing to load. Addresses the dev–doc–needed request for Bug 1860304 Background page fails to load if background.service_worker and background.scripts are both present.

[github-actions]

Preview URLs

• /en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/WebExtensions/manifest.json/background
• /en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Releases/121

External URLs (4)

URL: /en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/WebExtensions/manifest.json/background
Title: background

• https://bugzil.la/1860304 (1 time) (Note! This may be a new URL 👀)
• https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1573659 (1 time) (Note! This may be a new URL 👀)

---

URL: /en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Releases/121
Title: Firefox 121 for developers

• https://bugzil.la/1860304 (1 time) (Note! This may be a new URL 👀)
• https://crbug.com/1418934 (1 time) (Note! This may be a new URL 👀)

(comment last updated: 2023-11-10 01:14:04)

[Rob--W]

Could you also document the service_worker key at https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/WebExtensions/manifest.json/background ? And the behavior when scripts and service_worker are specified together. That's documented at w3c/webextensions#282 (comment)

[Rob--W]

@rebloor have you seen my previous comment?

Could you also document the service_worker key at https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/WebExtensions/manifest.json/background ? And the behavior when scripts and service_worker are specified together. That's documented at w3c/webextensions#282 (comment)

[Rob--W]

In my suggested text here, it's not obvious that it's about a change in Chrome 121. Are you able to improve the phrasing?

I used "incidentally" because the independent fixes landed in version 121 of both browsers.

[rebloor]

@Rob--W should be addressed now

[rebloor]

@rebloor have you seen my previous comment?

Sorry @Rob--W I tend to work through comments in the source code, and forget there can be ones outside. This should now be addressed.

[Rob--W]

The note applies to page and scripts and service_worker - basically every key. Would it make sense to turn the NOTE in a dedicated section and link it somewhere?

P.S. In another comment I suggested to add a code example to make the behavior easier to understand. That could then be a final part of the Example section.

[rebloor]

Thanks @Rob--W I've moved the content below the property descriptions to a new "browser support" section and included the example

[Rob--W]

Maybe move the Safari section after Firefox, so that the special cases with Chrome and Firefox are next to each other.

[rebloor]

Done

[Rob--W]

This whole section is kind of complex. I think that it would be easier to understand if we preface it by an example and then explain the result. Like this:

{
  "name": "Demo of service worker + event page",
  "version": "1",
  "manifest_version": 3,
  "background": {
    "scripts": ["background.js"],
    "service_worker": "background.js"
   }
}

background.js:

if (typeof browser == "undefined") {
  // Chrome does not support the browser namespace yet.
  globalThis.browser = chrome;
}
browser.runtime.onInstalled.addListener(() => {
  browser.tabs.create({ url: "http://example.com/firstrun.html" });
});