30 ms·
> I don't think this can be argued away. I'm not arguing that away. I'm saying that it doesn't imply firefox is copying Chrome. There are tradeoffs here. The
by Manishearth 9y ago
> I don't think this can be argued away.
I'm not arguing that away.
I'm saying that it doesn't imply firefox is copying Chrome.
There are tradeoffs here. The team weighed them and made a decision. It was not about copying Chrome.
> It also prevents valid use-cases such as modifying the UI, download management, implementing novel network protocols (think ipfs) and integrating it with the internal network request APIs.
Not necessarily, webextension APIs that provide better scoped hooks to this can be added. Except perhaps the novel network protocols one. But it depends.
- the8472 9y ago> Not necessarily, webextension APIs that provide better scoped hooks to this can be added. That mere possibility does not alter the fact that upon release of FF57 a long-tail set of features will unavailable at that given point, in other words there will be a decline and mozilla might work over time to win back some fraction of that decline. The net effect compared to today is still a decline in features, which is what will be perceived. Without escape hatches this system will always be inferior in its versatility. Which is why most runtimes do have escape hatches, they admit that any provided APIs will never be sufficient for all valid uses.
- yoasif_ 9y agoEscape hatches are provided by WebExtensions Experiments. https://webextensions-experiments.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://webextensions-experiments.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
- the8472 9y agoYou can't bundle those with an extension and get it published on release. They only function for prototyping things and hoping mozilla will bless them eventually.