Issue 5083 - Fix metadata regression introduced in previous patch set

Issue 5083 - Fix metadata regression introduced in previous patch set

[Jon Sonesen, 2017-04-11 05:44:10]

It seems that the problem was with the way the metadata ws ordered. I am ot
super familiar with all the ins and outs of the extension but after seeing there
were undefined errors, I figured this may be the case. I tested these changes on
chromium/chrome, only thing I noticed is that on chromium the devtools panel is
not being populated with the connections on the page.

[Sebastian Noack, 2017-04-11 08:22:20]

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29409555/diff/29409556/metadata.chrome
File metadata.chrome (right):

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29409555/diff/29409556/metadata.chrome#new...
metadata.chrome:116: lib/adblockplus.js +=
Why not just put them at the bottom of the list above?

  module.js = a.js b.js c.js

is essentially the same as:

  module.js = a.js b.js
  module.js += c.js

The latter syntax merely exist, so that you can append to a list that was
initially defined in a metadata file inherited from.

Moreover, I wonder why the order even matters here? The modules are executed in
the order they are imported anyway, in order to avoid issues like this. The
problem with ext/background.js is different since it is not a module, but are
you sure that the changing the order of the modules here is necessary?

[jsonesen, 2017-04-11 09:06:04]

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29409555/diff/29409556/metadata.chrome
File metadata.chrome (right):

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29409555/diff/29409556/metadata.chrome#new...
metadata.chrome:116: lib/adblockplus.js +=
On 2017/04/11 08:22:19, Sebastian Noack wrote:
> Why not just put them at the bottom of the list above?
> 
>   module.js = a.js b.js c.js
> 
> is essentially the same as:
> 
>   module.js = a.js b.js
>   module.js += c.js
> 
> The latter syntax merely exist, so that you can append to a list that was
> initially defined in a metadata file inherited from.
> 
> Moreover, I wonder why the order even matters here? The modules are executed
in
> the order they are imported anyway, in order to avoid issues like this. The
> problem with ext/background.js is different since it is not a module, but are
> you sure that the changing the order of the modules here is necessary?

My bad, I thought last night when testing that I checked whether or not they
were required here and found they were. As discussed In IRC I was mistaken. Will
fix.

[Sebastian Noack, 2017-04-11 09:11:57]

LGTM