3 ms·
And there's nothing in MV2 that uBlock Origin needs that doesn't exist in MV3 on Firefox, unlike Chrome. This issue is completely overblown.
by lxgr 6mo ago
And there's nothing in MV2 that uBlock Origin needs that doesn't exist in MV3 on Firefox, unlike Chrome. This issue is completely overblown.
- curt15 6mo agoAre you disputing uBlock Origin's list of MV3-incompatible capabilities [1]? [1] https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)#filtering-capabilities-which-cant-be-ported-to-mv3 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
- andrewaylett 6mo agoThat list contains issues with the APIs that Chrome exposes via MV3. Firefox still supports APIs that Chrome removed.
- lxgr 6mo agoNot really, but this FAQ, like almost all articles published on MV3, conflates MV3 the specification with Chrome's MV3 implementation. (FWIW, I'm almost certain that this is either due to sloppy/imprecise writing or intentional, with the authors not wanting to confuse users already appropriately riled up by equally imprecise reporting on MV3. They definitely know the difference.) In any case, for better or worse, when people say MV3, they now usually mean "Chrome's MV3 implementation", which obviously never applies to Firefox.
- ragall 6mo agoThat's utter bullshit. The author of uBlock Origin has posted a long list of capabilities that declarativeNetRequest does not support.
- tyushk 6mo agoUnlike Chrome, Firefox did not remove the older API.
- ragall 6mo agoWhat's this supposed to mean ? OP was saying that MV3 is feature-equivalent to MV2 and would like to see MV2 support removed from Firefox just as it was from Chrome. I replied pointing out that's utterly false.
- lxgr 6mo agoMV2 and MV3 are feature equivalent on Firefox when it comes to request blocking.