4 ms·

Instead of crying about it, WE can add suggested APIs to be included in the WebExtensions extension Firefox is using. They recently added the Sidebar API which

Instead of crying about it, WE can add suggested APIs to be included in the WebExtensions extension Firefox is using. They recently added the Sidebar API which allows a form for vertical tabs but nobody has implemented trees yet.

jplayer01 9y ago
They've shown themselves to be quite reluctant to accommodate the needs of vim extension authors (such as Vimperator). They can get bent.
- Etzos 9y ago
  As someone who hasn't followed the actual specifics here, do you happen to have any links to those discussions/issues or other places these things happened? I'd really like to see their reasoning.
- semi-extrinsic 9y ago
  Theres also been quite heated discussions (and hostility from Mozilla devs, to be frank) around the Zotero plugin, see e.g. Dan Stillman's 2015 blog post and email-list-threads linked there. https://danstillman.com/2015/11/23/firefox-extension-scanning-is-security-theater?firefox-against-censorship https://danstillman.com/2015/11/23/firefox-extension-scannin... Edit: for those who don't want to dig, a random quote: "Shortly before we left AMO [Firefox's integrated addon channel], an AMO editor publicly told someone asking a technical question about Zotero that Zotero was “evil”, adding, “They submit a new version every week, with thousands of lines of changes, nearly always additions. Every time I review it I hope they’ll go bankrupt”" It seems (from many signals) very much like Mozilla would prefer it if most Firefox addons were tiny 200 line hobby projects that got updated once a blue moon.
  - callahad 9y ago
    Many AMO Editors are volunteers, and all are human. We've significantly adjusted the AMO review guidelines and processes to avoid that sort of mishap in the future, as acknowledged at the end of that post. We're working hard on further changes to the process to reduce the stress and delays associated with manual review, including moving the review process to a post-publication check, instead of a pre-publication requirement. The heavy-handed review process was necessary with the old model of add-ons which had unrestricted access to the browser and to the host system. The new, permissions-based WebExtension model is dramatically easier to audit.
    - apostacy 9y ago
      Well, maybe this failure should be taken as a signal that you're doing something wrong. Google will always beat you at this, always. They can afford to pay far more people than you have volunteering for you, ever. There is no justification for Mozilla's extension policy. Mozilla is just LARPing as Google. They are superficially copying some features of Google's platform, in the hopes that they will magically inherit Google's success. Microsoft still sells their software in boxes in retails stores. Perhaps Mozilla should spend money pressing discs, but instead of selling it, they should give away Firefox discs in stores. That's a good analogue to what Mozilla is doing. This is a colossal waste of time that nobody asked for and nobody wants.
  - bryanrasmussen 9y ago
    well, thousands of lines of changes nearly always additions sounds like it should be a code smell / integration smell.
    - kasabali 9y ago
      that's not the topic though.
protomyth 9y ago
Perhaps before doing such a major change, Mozilla, who hosts and awful lot of the extensions, could have done some code analysis on said extensions to determine what APIs were needed to make a smooth transition. Saying WE can add suggestions is a foolish thing to ask users when they had a community of developers and the actual code to do an analysis on. Blaming users is poor form.

jplayer01 9y ago

They've shown themselves to be quite reluctant to accommodate the needs of vim extension authors (such as Vimperator). They can get bent.

Etzos 9y ago
As someone who hasn't followed the actual specifics here, do you happen to have any links to those discussions/issues or other places these things happened? I'd really like to see their reasoning.
semi-extrinsic 9y ago
Theres also been quite heated discussions (and hostility from Mozilla devs, to be frank) around the Zotero plugin, see e.g. Dan Stillman's 2015 blog post and email-list-threads linked there. https://danstillman.com/2015/11/23/firefox-extension-scanning-is-security-theater?firefox-against-censorship https://danstillman.com/2015/11/23/firefox-extension-scannin... Edit: for those who don't want to dig, a random quote: "Shortly before we left AMO [Firefox's integrated addon channel], an AMO editor publicly told someone asking a technical question about Zotero that Zotero was “evil”, adding, “They submit a new version every week, with thousands of lines of changes, nearly always additions. Every time I review it I hope they’ll go bankrupt”" It seems (from many signals) very much like Mozilla would prefer it if most Firefox addons were tiny 200 line hobby projects that got updated once a blue moon.
- callahad 9y ago
  Many AMO Editors are volunteers, and all are human. We've significantly adjusted the AMO review guidelines and processes to avoid that sort of mishap in the future, as acknowledged at the end of that post. We're working hard on further changes to the process to reduce the stress and delays associated with manual review, including moving the review process to a post-publication check, instead of a pre-publication requirement. The heavy-handed review process was necessary with the old model of add-ons which had unrestricted access to the browser and to the host system. The new, permissions-based WebExtension model is dramatically easier to audit.
  - apostacy 9y ago
    Well, maybe this failure should be taken as a signal that you're doing something wrong. Google will always beat you at this, always. They can afford to pay far more people than you have volunteering for you, ever. There is no justification for Mozilla's extension policy. Mozilla is just LARPing as Google. They are superficially copying some features of Google's platform, in the hopes that they will magically inherit Google's success. Microsoft still sells their software in boxes in retails stores. Perhaps Mozilla should spend money pressing discs, but instead of selling it, they should give away Firefox discs in stores. That's a good analogue to what Mozilla is doing. This is a colossal waste of time that nobody asked for and nobody wants.
- bryanrasmussen 9y ago
  well, thousands of lines of changes nearly always additions sounds like it should be a code smell / integration smell.
  - kasabali 9y ago
    that's not the topic though.

protomyth 9y ago

Perhaps before doing such a major change, Mozilla, who hosts and awful lot of the extensions, could have done some code analysis on said extensions to determine what APIs were needed to make a smooth transition. Saying WE can add suggestions is a foolish thing to ask users when they had a community of developers and the actual code to do an analysis on. Blaming users is poor form.