Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Firefox addons will now be only on WebExtensions

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 14:19

https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2016/11/23/add-ons-in-2017/

By the end of 2017, and with the release of Firefox 57, we’ll move to WebExtensions exclusively, and will stop loading any other extension types on desktop. To help ensure any new extensions work beyond the end of 2017, AMO will stop accepting any new extensions for signing that are not WebExtensions in Firefox 53. Throughout the year we’ll expand the set of APIs available, add capabilities to Firefox that don’t yet exist in other browsers, and put more WebExtensions in front of users.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 14:51

I don't even know what the difference between XUL and WebExtensions is. How bad is this? Does everything have to be written again from scratch?

I only use Firefox because of the addons. I don't want to lose Pendatactyl or Rikaichan.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 15:31

Why can't they stop adding crap, make a final version, and then just work on bug fixes?

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 15:37

>>3
Because the web is an EVOLVING PLATFORM that DELIVERS the latest SCALABLE SOLUTIONS.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 17:23

>>2 Bad. WebExtensions is crippled shit for Google browser using cucks.
Even their page admits its crippled.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/WebExtensions/Comparison_with_XUL_XPCOM_extensions
Special mention: with XUL i can write daily any micro-extensions in KeyConfig bound to hotkeys(basically ANY privileged JS apis) in the browser and they run instantly(ala REPL-level of interaction). You can create private extensions and install them as you see fit from any site.

With WebExtensions: Any extension must be signed and approved by AMO(since firefox 48), even unlisted and private.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing
/Distribution#Unlisted_add-ons

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 17:24

>>2
How bad is this?
Very bad. The ability to customize UI will be strictly limited.
Does everything have to be written again from scratch?
Yes, everything that is related to UI.
I don't want to lose Pendatactyl or Rikaichan.
I think there is no way to rewrite these addons.
>>3
Why can't they stop adding crap, make a final version, and then just work on bug fixes?
Tehy are competing with google chrome, if they stop releasing often, bydlo would think they are stuck in development and move to chrome.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 21:12

Firefox is open-source. Just fork their repository and maintain a browser that supports XUL.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-26 21:55

>>7
no man has that capability, the effort to maintain a browser is absolutely enormous

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 2:28

>>8
Move JavaScript into a plugin. Voila! Your browser (without the plugin) has no exploits and fits on a floppy disk.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 8:22

>>8
You don't need to maintain it much. If your userbase is a handful of neckbeards, you'll barely get any bugreports, and most of them will have patches submitted anyway. Firefox as it is works in 99% of cases, most of 'maintenance' will consist of doing nothing while the main Mozilla branch gets a pointless release every other day in a pointless attempt to imitate Chrome.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 8:32

With WebExtensions: Any extension must be signed and approved by AMO(since firefox 48), even unlisted and private.
What? Why? This is totally retarded, they should at least allow you to add your own public keys in a whitelist.

>>7
Thankfully there is already a fork that does this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Moon_%28web_browser%29

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 9:00

>>11
So, problem solved. Just use Pale Moon.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 9:17

>>10
The effort depends on what kind of browser
1.No graphics, plain text,no js/css. links-tier, a few weeks.
2.Graphics/Video/Sound/etc, no js/css a few months.(more if rare formats and latest standards)
3.same as #2 with css probably 4-6 months CSS3 parity
4.JS interpreter. 1 year(for decent speed and WebGL 1.5-2years)
Keep in mind it will be filled with bugs/incompatibilities, used by almost nobody and will be slower than everything else.
Browsers today are essentially "Virtual machines" for content, not "Web parsers/viewers".

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 9:32

Goodnight, sweet prince.
I'll move to one of forks.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 16:49

Why though? What's their endgame?

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 17:23

>>15
There is no endgame, it's job security through feeping creaturism.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-27 17:48

>>13
Browsers today are essentially "Virtual machines" for content, not "Web parsers/viewers".
Same holds true for ps/pdf viewers.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-28 7:13

Well, so at least we need some money to maintain a new fork. What if we start an initiative on kickstarter or any other similar site?
Someday someone will do it anyway.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-29 1:23

dubs getting real close

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-29 2:42

>>19
That's not the only thing getting close
*grabs dick*

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-30 7:31

>>18
We need to recruit local autists and make them cooperate.
First we need to decide on the browser name.

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-30 7:35

Dibs

Name: Anonymous 2016-11-30 10:55

>>2
Webextensions exist within a sandbox model while XUL extensions have direct access to the OS and OS files.

>>8
You're not maintaining the Gecko rendering engine. You're supposed to be maintaining the XUL GUI toolkit. All you have to do is pair XUL to current versions of Gecko.
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode + RSS -