
WebExtensions in Firefox 48 - matteotom
https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2016/04/29/webextensions-in-firefox-48/
======
lewisl9029
I've been working on a very simple WebExtension [1] lately, mostly to
experiment with the API and familiarize myself with extensions development in
general, and the reload functionality and compatibility improvements are
definitely very welcome additions.

I would also prefer to have the extensions debugging controls available in the
about:addons page as opposed to in a separate about:debugging page, similar to
how Chrome's chrome://extensions/ page is organized.

Also, I'm curious if there are any plans to implement something like Chrome's
event pages [2] as an alternative to having a background page running
constantly for extensions that don't require a long-running process?

[1] [https://github.com/lewisl9029/just-save-
webextension](https://github.com/lewisl9029/just-save-webextension)

[2]
[https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/event_pages](https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/event_pages)

------
nathancahill
The topic's been discussed to death, but I'm really disappointed that Firefox
extensions have gone the direction of Chrome's. Sure, it's nice to have
compatibility, but at the cost of Firefox's more powerful extensions? No thank
you.

~~~
clouddrover
> _but at the cost of Firefox 's more powerful extensions?_

What do you believe you'll be missing? Add-on authors say the new API will
meet their needs. Giorgio Maone, the author of NoScript, says he's satisfied
with the direction of the development of the new API:
[https://hackademix.net/2016/03/09/webrequest-where-were-
wher...](https://hackademix.net/2016/03/09/webrequest-where-were-where-were-
going/)

If you develop some add-on that needs features the new API doesn't currently
provide then I'd say the best thing to do is to get involved with the
development and get those features added.

~~~
Veratyr
Does the new API support things like tree style tabs [0]? This is one of the
things I've failed to see other browsers implement.

[0] [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-
ta...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/)

~~~
clouddrover
If it doesn't yet, it will. Support for add-ons like Tree Style Tabs has been
on their radar since development of the new API started:

1\. [https://billmccloskey.wordpress.com/2015/08/21/firefox-
add-o...](https://billmccloskey.wordpress.com/2015/08/21/firefox-add-on-
changes/)

2\.
[https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebExtensions#Additional_APIs](https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebExtensions#Additional_APIs)

3\.
[https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebExtensions/RoadMap](https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebExtensions/RoadMap)

~~~
the8472
That just means that certain popular addons will get the support necessary to
have their needs satisfied.

Some niche ideas won't get support and thus die.

That's the problem with a gated system where you can only do things approved
by HQ.

------
BuckRogers
I've used Firefox since about 2001 when it was in beta and I agree with those
that say this isn't an improvement. It seems like control. You need Mozilla to
approve of any advanced API you may need access to.

It's probably high time to write a libre browser that focuses on being
completely customizable. And not focus primarily on speed. I'm bewildered by
those who are deadset on that over all else, it just serves into the goals of
for-profits who can dump tremendous resources into optimizing to bamboozle
away freedom.

Freedom doesn't cost millions of dollars. A libre Vivaldi, with a tighter
feature scope (no email client etc) is where it would be at.

~~~
alexvoda
I would point you towards this: [https://kver.wordpress.com/2015/09/18/on-ad-
blocking-trackin...](https://kver.wordpress.com/2015/09/18/on-ad-blocking-
tracking-and-privacy-in-fiber/) Unfortunately development is at a standstill
right now. More hands on deck are needed. If other people will not participate
at first it might not even use CEF as planned. Using CEF would be great
because it will eventually allow it to use both Servo and Blink.

Also worth mentioning is the other (than Vivaldi) let's recreate classic Opera
project: [http://otter-browser.org/](http://otter-browser.org/)

Of course both of these are very very young projects and aren't really ready
to replace Firefox.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
Firefox is taking a subset of Chrome's API, and adding its own pieces. I
wonder if some of Firefox's additions will make their way back to Chrome.

