tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post2175949321453048810..comments2024-03-24T17:13:53.855-07:00Comments on TenFourFox Development: Mozilla's future footgun add-on policy (or, how MoFo leadership is getting it totally wrong)ClassicHasClasshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17331846076856918359noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-90706661277280683262015-08-22T22:37:43.487-07:002015-08-22T22:37:43.487-07:00I think this is an overly fine point, however. By ...I think this is an overly fine point, however. By announcing a more or less firm timeframe for when they will be deprecated, you're essentially saying any future work on them will be for naught, thus deprecating them now. In fact, I'd even argue that effect is desirable for this goal.ClassicHasClasshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17331846076856918359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-53959387535664440022015-08-22T22:35:31.777-07:002015-08-22T22:35:31.777-07:00Fair enough, although I doubt very much there'...Fair enough, although I doubt very much there'd be much notable change to any foundation classes such as, say, nsISupports, or the networking components.ClassicHasClasshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17331846076856918359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-56864993534996566302015-08-22T22:15:06.251-07:002015-08-22T22:15:06.251-07:00Actually we dropped the notion of frozen XPCOM int...Actually we dropped the notion of frozen XPCOM interfaces some time ago, around Firefox 4.0 IIRC. Any interfaces that claim to be frozen probably shouldn't.<br /><br />Also this isn't just about electrolysis, we've been talking about removing XPCOM and XUL access from add-ons for some time because it has been a continual source of pain holding back development in many ways.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-57697603858327102702015-08-22T22:13:34.309-07:002015-08-22T22:13:34.309-07:00FWIW the thing that is being deprecated six months...FWIW the thing that is being deprecated six months after electrolysis ships is CPOWs and the compatibility shims that keep many existing add-ons working albeit by imposing a serious performance penalty. The timeline of deprecating XUL and XPCOM access for add-ons isn't tied specifically to the electrolysis release (though the fact that that will likely end support for a lot of add-ons is a contributing factor).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-61176149554030862912015-08-22T10:57:45.993-07:002015-08-22T10:57:45.993-07:00No, I think you're (mostly) off base. XPCOM *h...No, I think you're (mostly) off base. XPCOM *has* stable interfaces. Half of them are frozen, have been for years. Read any number of the IDLs and see for yourself. Besides, you don't even have to muck around with that if you don't want to -- the Jetpack idea added on a friendlier layer. If you don't like the Jetpack API, that's not XPCOM's fault.<br /><br />And as an addon developer, aren't you concerned about what this actually means for what you're allowed to do? WebExtensions restricts addons to the view of what our betters believe an addon should do. If there is no explicit API, there is no support or even ability, whereas XPCOM let me create a component to do almost anything.<br /><br />In the end, you might conclude (and Mozilla clearly has) that tossing all that is worth it to make Electrolysis work, assuming it does. That's fine, but I don't share that optimism or that belief.ClassicHasClasshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17331846076856918359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-61171985723272951762015-08-22T08:39:23.935-07:002015-08-22T08:39:23.935-07:00XPCOM is the real footgun here, actually.
As an a...XPCOM is the real footgun here, actually.<br /><br />As an addon developer I've pined for the day where I had stable, documented, public APIs to work with instead of the fragile crap XPCOM usually provides. I've wanted to make it easier to keep my addons working across platforms and themes, have my AMO addons reviewed more quickly, and dreamed to see a standard emerge for making addons more portable across browsers.<br /><br />As a user I've pined for the day where I can know that addons are restricted in what they can do, and have the more advanced ones break less often between versions. I've been frustrated to no end with how poorly these addons work in Electrolysis, and frankly while TenFourFox is awesome and the work you've done is amazing, I don't want Firefox to be held back anymore by obvious shortcomings that people illogically defend.<br /><br />We have this silly rose-colored view of XPCOM style addons, always ignoring all of the obvious, terrible problems with them just because they're powerful. Now Mozilla wants to improve the status quo, and all I'm seeing is people making snap judgments, clearly without even reading the statements and insights Mozilla has offered. It's really disappointing.El Goopohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11343976586944126047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-6262538657250117172015-08-22T08:22:53.453-07:002015-08-22T08:22:53.453-07:00That presupposes that the Firefox-specific APIs wi...That presupposes that the Firefox-specific APIs will remain specific to Firefox. Chrome cannot match the flexibility of XPCOM/XUL, but they can add the APIs that addon authors demand under this model. It will be, effectively, a new "embrace and extend."ClassicHasClasshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17331846076856918359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-3971980077632753322015-08-22T02:55:57.671-07:002015-08-22T02:55:57.671-07:00You're making the assumption that WebExtension...You're making the assumption that WebExtensions must and will be limited to the APIs Chrome provides. But this isn't true.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01801341049800948737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1015214236289077798.post-20725769188850105372015-08-21T22:06:18.869-07:002015-08-21T22:06:18.869-07:00I was thinking about waiting until Servo actually ...I was thinking about waiting until Servo actually replaces Gecko to ditch XUL/XPCOM add-ons, given that Servo will never support it anyway.Yuhong Baohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14519473280837410246noreply@blogger.com