MozillaZine

[Ext] Add Bookmark Here ²

Announce and Discuss the Latest Theme and Extension Releases.
enbalmed
 
Posts: 24
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:27 am

Post Posted August 18th, 2017, 4:10 pm

mancode20 wrote:Probably a dumb question, but does Xeonx's fix work with Firefox 56 Beta 3, or no? Let me know. Thanks!

Xeonx's mod was apparently incorporated by yuoo2k (the ABH2 developer) with the release of 55.0.20170705, so they're one and the same now (or yuoo2k added a minor fix to Xeonx's.)

Anyway, as for compatibility, ABH2 will have issues with any FF version > 52 or 53 - i.e. some functions will work and some won't. And of course, when FF 57 arrives, it will cease working altogether.

enbalmed
 
Posts: 24
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:27 am

Post Posted August 20th, 2017, 10:03 am

xeonx wrote:yuoo2k, Yes, it is unfortunate that Firefox is pushing to completely remove XUL support, instead of just discouraging it, as there are a few extensions that can't or won't be ported to it.
I think I can speak for the community in saying: thank you so much for all your hard work in creating this, and the many hours of time and frustration you have saved everyone by doing so!!
Will you please consider at least an attempt to port to WebExtensions if it all possible, as this is one of the critical extensions that makes Firefox worth using over Chrome.
Also, can you release this source code this on GitHub and update the addon page with warning about the future, link to source on GitHub, and request for volunteers to help port it?

Ditto on the thanks to yuoo2k. I would certainly understand if he ends up walking away from it. The last few years of Mozilla changes have made it tough for add-on developers to keep pace.
Note that the ABH2 page has a donation link, and yuoo2k may not have rec'd much or any such incentives. I'd be willing to donate if I thought it would help, but I'm only one person, so my sole contribution is not going to be enough.

As far as porting ABH2 to WebExtensions (WExt) goes, keep in mind that it will first depend on what the WExt API's allow. As we're hearing, some add-ons will go dormant soon because said API's appear to be more restrictive and don't (yet?) offer the necessary comparable functions/etc.

In my case, I plan on switching from FF 55.x Release to FF 52.x ESR - for as long as it lasts - while I see how many of the add-ons I use get ported.
And then depending on what happens, I may end up switching to - or using in tandem - some FF fork like SeaMonkey, Waterfox, or Pale Moon. The latter two have pledged continued support for XUL/etc for the forseeable future (see WF1, PM1, PM2.) And in the case of PM, they've had a compatible version of ABH2 + GitHub page for some time now.

In the meantime, I'd be willing to pitch in on fixing/maintaining the current ABH2 code for one of the forks, and to possibly help port it to WExt down the road - should that be possible.

DN123ABC
 
Posts: 299
Joined: January 9th, 2017, 10:10 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 6:24 am

enbalmed wrote:
DN123ABC (on Jan 17th, 2017) wrote:Did this extension take the place of the one named "Add Bookmark Here 3.0" by Daniel Lindkvist? I have that older one in my extensions list, but disabled (probably incompatible). Thanks.

DN123ABC (on Aug 17th, 2017) wrote:I just checked, and I have Add Bookmark Here version 3.0. How come this doesn't update? It is disabled, but I know other disabled extensions/addons still update.

This thread is for "Add Bookmark Here 2," which is currently at v55.0.20170705
There's no v3.0 AFAIK. It sounds like you're talking about the old "Add Bookmark Here," which discontinued at v0.5.8 in 2007. (Unless its author released an unofficial build somewhere.)


The one I am referring to points here:

http://gorgias.de/mfe/

enbalmed
 
Posts: 24
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:27 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 8:06 am

DN123ABC wrote:The one I am referring to points here:
http://gorgias.de/mfe/

Yeah, that's the home page link for the old "Add Bookmark Here" - long since dead.
I don't know why it says "3.0" in your browser when it's listed as v0.5.8 on Mozilla.
In any case, it's probably been disabled on your system for a long time now, eh...

DN123ABC
 
Posts: 299
Joined: January 9th, 2017, 10:10 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 9:09 am

Looking up in Google: Add Bookmark Here 3.0 brings up viewtopic.php?f=48&t=522643&start=75

enbalmed
 
Posts: 24
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:27 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 10:48 am

DN123ABC wrote:Looking up in Google: Add Bookmark Here 3.0 brings up viewtopic.php?f=48&t=522643&start=75

Pffft, okay, that's pg 6 of this thread. According to which, it does indeed appear that ABH2 was at v3.0 - about 9 yrs ago...
But what are you after here? You're wondering why a disabled add-on isn't updating? What difference does it make if you're not using it... If you were looking to use it, then you'd be asking how to get it going again. And the answer would be: remove it, and reinstall the current version (or possibly v52, depending.) Except that - as recent posts in this thread make clear - ABH2 is partially broken, and will cease to function altogether when FF 57 arrives...

DN123ABC
 
Posts: 299
Joined: January 9th, 2017, 10:10 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 10:52 am

It probably worked up until some time ago, after which I disregarded it, but kept it as disabled. Other extensions, even if disabled, still update. Strange this one didn't. I remember liking this one, so would like to track if it ever comes back, I guess. Weird the cross-breeding in versions. Thanks.

mancode20
 
Posts: 36
Joined: September 8th, 2015, 2:30 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 4:40 pm

If everyone is going to switch to a fork when Firefox 57 comes out, which fork should we switch to, Pale Moon or Waterfox? I have heard good things about both, but I am wondering will any of them support multi-process? (E10's) That is pretty important to have. If we can have that with the XUL compatibility, then that might be the way to go until enough Web Extensions appear for 57. Which fork supports AddBookmarkHere2? That is an essential add-on to have.

L.A.R. Grizzly

User avatar
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: March 15th, 2005, 5:32 pm
Location: Akron, Ohio, USA

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 4:47 pm

mancode20 wrote: Which fork supports AddBookmarkHere2? That is an essential add-on to have.


Waterfox supports AddBookmarkHere2 52.0.20170311

Pale Moon has it's own version Add Bookmark Here ² (Moon Edition) 1.0.1
Win7 Pro SP1 64 Bit
Comodo Internet Security
Pale Moon 27.6.1, Firefox 52.5.0esr, SeaMonkey 2.48, FossaMail 38.6.0 and Thunderbird 52.4.0

mancode20
 
Posts: 36
Joined: September 8th, 2015, 2:30 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 7:29 pm

Thanks! It's looking like Waterfox might be worth checking out. My main problem with Firefox right now, is when I add some items to the toolbar, it makes the URL bar shrink so small, that I can barely see the site I am on. Is there a way to make the URL bar and search bar have one toolbar like the old retro look of Firefox that Waterfox appears to have, then have a second toolbar for just icons you add from extensions? Such as Zoom Page controls, Ublock, etc. That would be the ideal solution. I would also settle for moving my toolbar icons to the add-on bar at the bottom, which can be restored by using an extension called The Add-On Bar Restored, but I don't know if it works with Firefox 56. I wish I could just create a new toolbar with just icons right underneath the URL bar. Is it possible?

L.A.R. Grizzly

User avatar
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: March 15th, 2005, 5:32 pm
Location: Akron, Ohio, USA

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 7:38 pm

mancode20 wrote:Thanks! It's looking like Waterfox might be worth checking out.


I just installed Waterfox 55.0.2 and it displays the Legacy warnings just like FX (it froze often when I opened the Add-ons Manager). It also disabled one of my extensions (the same one that FX disabled). I had high hopes, but it looks as if there's no difference between WF 55.0.2 and FX 55.0.2. :cry:
Win7 Pro SP1 64 Bit
Comodo Internet Security
Pale Moon 27.6.1, Firefox 52.5.0esr, SeaMonkey 2.48, FossaMail 38.6.0 and Thunderbird 52.4.0

mancode20
 
Posts: 36
Joined: September 8th, 2015, 2:30 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 8:12 pm

Thanks for the head-up! I am still on the fence about trying it myself.

L.A.R. Grizzly

User avatar
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: March 15th, 2005, 5:32 pm
Location: Akron, Ohio, USA

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 8:20 pm

mancode20 wrote:Thanks for the head-up! I am still on the fence about trying it myself.


Yeah, it's a shame because WF 54.0.1 was great. I guess the developer incorporated the same features as FX in the new version. He mentioned that he was going to keep supporting XUL, but I don't see it with the add-ons I have. Oh well, it's uninstalled now...
Win7 Pro SP1 64 Bit
Comodo Internet Security
Pale Moon 27.6.1, Firefox 52.5.0esr, SeaMonkey 2.48, FossaMail 38.6.0 and Thunderbird 52.4.0

enbalmed
 
Posts: 24
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:27 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 8:33 pm

L.A.R. Grizzly wrote:
mancode20 wrote:Thanks! It's looking like Waterfox might be worth checking out.

I just installed Waterfox 55.0.2 and it displays the Legacy warnings just like FX (it froze often when I opened the Add-ons Manager). It also disabled one of my extensions (the same one that FX disabled). I had high hopes, but it looks as if there's no difference between WF 55.0.2 and FX 55.0.2. :cry:

For FF, pre-v57, there's more than one reason why an add-on can end up disabled, and depending on what that is, you may be able to get it working again with some config file modification. (E.g., see this page and its bottom post.)

In general terms of add-on compatibility, AFAICT, the safest browser choice for the near future currently appears to be the FF ESR channel (currently at v52.3.)

Anyway, this discussion of switching to FF forks is incidental to the topic of ABH2 so I'll leave it at that. There's other forum threads out there that address the big FF 57 changeover to WebExtensions - and what to do about it - in more detail. The primary reason that I touched on it was to say that I'm willing to help maintain the current ABH2 code since viable browser options exist for which it should still be useable for at least another year.

enbalmed
 
Posts: 24
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:27 am

Post Posted August 21st, 2017, 8:41 pm

L.A.R. Grizzly wrote:
mancode20 wrote:Thanks for the head-up! I am still on the fence about trying it myself.

Yeah, it's a shame because WF 54.0.1 was great. I guess the developer incorporated the same features as FX in the new version. He mentioned that he was going to keep supporting XUL, but I don't see it with the add-ons I have. Oh well, it's uninstalled now...

WF 55 should still have XUL sppt, as indicated here.
So you may want to post to the Waterfox forum or reddit page, as you could have just run in to a bug in the dev's compile/implementation.

Return to Extension/Theme Releases


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests