Update google-chrome extension

[rsperezn]

Description

Screencast

Checklist

• [x] I read the extension guidelines
• [x] I read the documentation about publishing
• [x] I ran npm run build and tested this distribution build in Raycast
• [x] I checked that files in the assets folder are used by the extension itself
• [x] I checked that assets used by the README are placed outside of the metadata folder

[raycastbot]

Thank you for your contribution! :tada:

🔔 @rgomezcasas @bromanko @crisboarna @andreaselia @rtyke @karolre @Aiee @nagauta @a-laughlin @tleo19 @Tarocch1 you might want to have a look.

You can use this guide to learn how to check out the Pull Request locally in order to test it.

You can expect an initial review within five business days.

[rsperezn]

This allows us to configure the Chrome profile path rather than hardcoding it

[rsperezn]

[a-laughlin]

Thanks for submitting a new PR. Taking a look now.

[a-laughlin]

It looks like in the two commits, 6547884 has the message updated and linting unchanged, then commit 71712ec has linting updated and message unchanged. Up for one more with both?

[a-laughlin]

Great! Looks good to merge once reviewed by Raycast folks. cc @pernielsentikaer

Side note I got curious and looked at what happens to the new error message once it's thrown. It appears to be ignored (useBookmarksSearch) and unhandled (useHistorySearch).

Error handling is inconsistent and could use some cleanup. To avoid blocking this PR, I created a separate issue for updating error handling in useHistorySearch and useBookmarksSearch.

Merging this without improving the error handling will still improve the errors. In the bookmarks case, the error will be as unhelpful as it currently is. In the unhandled useHistorySearch case, the new helpful error will replace the inaccurate Google Chrome not installed message.

[rsperezn]

yeah @a-laughlin I guess we can have a new erroView for it, great call and thanks for the patience reviewing the PR

[pernielsentikaer]

What do you think @a-laughlin - use the type directory or use what's there today, a textfield?

I'm unsure what's best and easiest in this case

[a-laughlin]

What are the effects of setting the type to directory instead of textfield? The documentation doesn't specify how they differ.

[a-laughlin]

I have a bunch going on this week. Limited time to test. Assuming directory does something like a file chooser, I'd go with the text field. The chrome profile screen gives a path to copy. That's easier to insert in a text field than going through a file chooser.

[rsperezn]

yeah it's a file chooser @a-laughlin . We should just go with something to start with. The latest commit change it to directory type

[github-actions[bot]]

Published to the Raycast Store: https://raycast.com/Codely/google-chrome

[raycastbot]

:tada: :tada: :tada:

We've rewarded your Raycast account with some credits. You will soon be able to exchange them for some swag.