I've just compared beta 130.0b3 with an older version 115.14.0

Both using Font size 12px and 'compact'

I agree with you that there is an increase in the spacing between folders in Folder Pane.

I'm trying to recall if this was done because people where experiencing some folder names being cut off so extra space was required. Basically done to fix a bug. If I find it, I'll get back to you.

Thank you Toad-Hall. I look forward to hearing from you again when you hopefully you may be able to fix this.

Hello there We have read the question We try to help

The changes in this are probably no more than because it is a beta version and can no longer be found if the version is stable or complete and downloaded.

Greetings Firefox volunteer

Hello there

Feel good and take a full version of us.

https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/releases/

Greetings Firefox volunteer

Hello

Thank you for your offer of help on this matter.

However, after following the link you provided, the latest version offered is 128.1.1, which the version I am using, i.e. the version where the Compact Density has been changed, and is effectively no longer Compact.

Any further thoughts?

Many thanks

Brian

I've been trawling through bug reports regarding version 115* and the Density settings. I've been trying to find out what's been going on and why.

You have to bare in mind that everything is sized by pixel size and needs to work on different OS and also computers/ monitors do not all have the same size set for a pixel. If you changed the screen resolution on computer (I'm not suggesting this is required) you would find the space would increase or decrease depending upon resolution settings because they alter the size of a pixel.

The Folder Pane and the Message List both are effected by the same font size and density settings. So size etc has to work in both locations. You also have to make sure the UI is inclusive in design meaning suitable for a variety of needs and user abilities. The icons etc use 16x16

Bug reports took this sort of form: There were quite a few complaints that the compact was too compact in 115* compared to a previous version - not enough space between items, so difficult to read. In some reports the Compact setting was having issues with Message List - not scrolling correctly so items at the bottom could not be accessed. Another real problem was the Bottom of gpqj letters (descenders) is cut off when compact density is used. - Conclusion was the row height/density to be font size dependant.

In 115* as an example font size 16px with compact starts to cut of letters. You must use 15px or less. I can easily reproduce that issue. It's not just about the Density, you have to consider what people may choose for Font Size and also take into consideration the space required for the various icons and extra display when something is selected or not.

So it seems the 115* compact worked perfectly for some people (like you and me) under specific conditions but equally caused readibility issues for others, so a compromise in design was made to find an optimum that satisfied all the important issues.

Basically the height of spacing needed to be modified in order to fix a variety of bugs which caused various usability issues.

Also the new design in Supernova 115* now has a thin blue line around outer edge of a selected folder which uses a couple of pixels.

This explains what has occured and why.

Hi Toad-Hall

Thank you for your detailed explanation regarding this issue, but it doesn't solve how I can revert the View>Density>Compact to the way it was in version 115.

I also use Firefox Browser and I am familiar with using code in a userChrome.css file in order to achieve custom layouts, etc., for individual use, and I have done this in Firefox to achieve a compact view of Bookmarks. I presume that this procedure would be possible if I added a Chrome folder and a userChrome.css file to my TB profile folder.

If I am correct that this is possible, would you be able to provide me the the necessary code to enter in the userChrome.css file?

Try this: You may need to alter a preference in Config Editor

*    Settings > General

• Scroll to bottom and click on 'Config Editor' button
• In search type : legacy
• look for this line: toolkit.legacyUserProfileCustomizations.stylesheets
• If it is set as 'false' :
• click on the far right arrow type icon to toggle from 'false' to say 'TRUE'

In Thunderbird

• Help > Troubleshooting Information
• in 'Application Basics' - Profile Folders - click on 'Open Folder'

A new window opens showing the contents of your profile name folder.

• Exit Thunderbird now. This is important.

• In the 'profile name ' folder create a new folder and call it 'chrome'. The spelling is important - note it is all lower case.
• Then open a simple text editor program such as 'Notepad'.
• Copy all the text between the lines below and paste it into 'Notepad'.

/* FOLDER PANE  row height */
li[is="folder-tree-row"] {
	line-height: 18px !important;
}

Save as 'userChrome.css' in 'chrome' folder

Start Thunderbird

REport on results.

Hi Toad-Hall

I really appreciate your help in trying to find a way to correct this change of Density>Compact, but I regret to say that the above solution didn't work.

Are you able to suggest another piece of code that might work?

Many thanks

Brian

Further to my earlier email today, one other thing I meant to mention was: In your previous reply you stated the Compact Density had been changed because many people had complained that when using it they lost part of the folder names. If this is true, then why weren't they informed to switch to Default Density, and leave Compact Density as it was for those of us who like it.

I have spent weeks learning how to use Thunderbird and I loved the Compact Density, but now it has been ruined.

This is the first time I have used the Support facility. How do we ask the developers to revert this change?

Many thanks

Brian

Further to my previous reply September 5th 2024, I notice that this problem has been marked solved, but it hasn't been solved. Do you have any further offer of code or other suggestions to try that will bring back Compact Density?

Many thanks

Brian