Re:Manifest v3 Update
by throwaway77112 on Thursday May 27, 2021 @03:36PM
(#27307199)
Also ublock origin on Firefox has significant advantages over that in chrome
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
Re:Manifest v3 Update
by nonbirithm on Thursday May 27, 2021 @03:44PM
(#27307324)
> extension makers will only consider porting to Firefox if it's as little effort as possible. Hence they need to support the same API's
At least the last time I developed a browser extension, this was not the case. I found that what was considered the WebExtension API was not 100% portable across browsers, and I had to rewrite parts of my code between Chrome and Firefox because Chrome had many extra APIs that Firefox lacked.
If you compare with attempting to share code between XUL addons and Chrome extensions, you'll notice that things have gotten muuuuuuuuch simpler, though.
"As little effort as possible" does not mean that it should be perfectly identical - sometimes that's just not an option. They're striving to be as close as possible though, and this is part of that.
Re:Manifest v3 Update
by nextaccountic on Thursday May 27, 2021 @10:58PM
(#27311263)
Isn't there any framework for abstracting away the differences between the two browsers? With polyfills or whatever.
However, if Mozilla intended to keep the option of blocking webRequest (or whatever's necessary to keep uBlock possible), it would also look like this. It's not an option for Mozilla not to support the Chrome API, because the entire point of WebExtensions is the admission that Chrome is the dominant browser, and extension makers will only consider porting to Firefox if it's as little effort as possible. Hence they need to support the same API's.
Given that uBlock Origin was the first extension they added support for in Firefox for Android, I'm relatively confident that they're intent on making sure it stays able to do its job.