The future of Firefox - Themes/Personas, Extensions/Jetpack

[malliz]

Still around and keeping an eye on things

[WildcatRay]

Still around and keeping an eye on things

[ShareBird]

What do you think about listing the issues we think need to be fixed and file respective bugs?

[patrickjdempsey]

It can't hurt anything. At least that way if they do get wontfixed, we will have a real answer.

[LoudNoise]

We already know from our users that incompatible add-ons are a significant factor in opting out of updates.

I would really like to know where this came from. If it comes from the questions you get when you uninstall Firefox I suspect it isn't a reliable number. You would also need to ask if the user did update sometime in the future when the theme/extension was released.

The sentence seems to suggest that they are polling users that have not upgraded. How? It would not be possible unless something triggered the poll at an Mozilla owned site.

[Ken Saunders]

I have much less at stake than most of you here, but along the lines of ShareBird's question (about filing bugs), it wouldn't be a bad idea to find some constructive ways to try and move forward and perhaps get some things done to get to a point to where you all are a lot happier with Mozilla than you are now.
I know that's not easy, and reading my earlier comments you'll see how I feel about all of this, but now what?

[ShareBird]

So, please let's make the list here, I can file the respective bugs there. Patrick?

[CatThief]

I believe at this point we need a different approach. Simply asking Mozilla if they are abandoning themes in the near future, far future, or any future at all, is only leading to generic answers in an attempt to appease us. "XUL-based add-ons are not going anywhere in the foreseeable future" and "add-ons are here to stay" is a contradiction at best.

We should be asking more specific questions:

Why is the Mozilla organization actively working against it's own community, in this case, it's theming community?

Why are they are using every tactic they can to discredit and discourage themers?
Why are they hiding the Themes section at addons.mozilla.org?
Why are they stopping themes from working with Personas?
Why are they redirecting the Get Themes link to Personas?
Why are they spreading rumors of low usage? (See Frank Lion's post here)
Why are they spreading rumors of security scares with themes? (See Mike Connor's blog here)
Why are they over emphasizing the significance of a 3-second restart?
Why are they over emphasizing the version compatibility issue during updates?
Why is their ultimate goal to phase out themes in favor of Personas when in truth both systems can coexist as separate entities?
Why are they attempting to instill fear and uncertainty in both theme developers and general users?
Why are they making contradictory statements in an effort to quiet the outrage? (See The AMO team's blog here)
Why is this documented elsewhere as something set in stone? (See mozilla wiki here and Asa's blog here)

Why?

[aaron]

We already know from our users that incompatible add-ons are a significant factor in opting out of updates.

Maybe I'm missing something, but shouldn't that statement show the Mozilla folks how important users feel extensions/themes are to them? If they're willing to forgo product updates to retain extension/theme functionality then I'd say that extensions/themes are pretty darn important to users. Thus, all the more reason for the Mozilla folks to embrace us with open arms rather than piss in our cornflakes.

[Aronnax!]

I believe at this point we need a different approach. Simply asking Mozilla if they are abandoning themes in the near future, far future, or any future at all, is only leading to generic answers in an attempt to appease us. "XUL-based add-ons are not going anywhere in the foreseeable future" and "add-ons are here to stay" is a contradiction at best.

We should be asking more specific questions:

Why is the Mozilla organization actively working against it's own community, in this case, it's theming community?

Why are they are using every tactic they can to discredit and discourage themers?
Why are they hiding the Themes section at addons.mozilla.org?
Why are they stopping themes from working with Personas?
Why are they redirecting the Get Themes link to Personas?
Why are they spreading rumors of low usage? (See Frank Lion's post here)
Why are they spreading rumors of security scares with themes? (See Mike Connor's blog here)
Why are they over emphasizing the significance of a 3-second restart?
Why are they over emphasizing the version compatibility issue during updates?
Why is their ultimate goal to phase out themes in favor of Personas when in truth both systems can coexist as separate entities?
Why are they attempting to instill fear and uncertainty in both theme developers and general users?
Why are they making contradictory statements in an effort to quiet the outrage? (See The AMO team's blog here)
Why is this documented elsewhere as something set in stone? (See mozilla wiki here and Asa's blog here)

Why?

Hi,
I would suggest to go to mozilla.dev.apps.firefox with a newsgroup app. - for example Thunderbird - news.mozilla.org is for example a free newsgroup server therefor.

You can read it here as well (but the thread is then fragmented and incomplete)
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla. ... 4cb9?pli=1

Every question is more more less already asked - some of these in other threads already months ago as well.

When you want to ask it again. There is the best place, when you want an answer from guiding developer.

Cheers

[CatThief]

I would suggest to go to mozilla.dev.apps.firefox with a newsgroup app. - for example Thunderbird - news.mozilla.org is for example a free newsgroup server therefor.

Yes, I am quite aware of that newsgroup, and also the use of Thunderbird for providing access.

Every question is more more less already asked - some of these in other threads already months ago as well.

When you want to ask it again. There is the best place, when you want an answer from guiding developer.

I don't detect guidance there or elsewhere. At one time I actually had hope that this would be resolved in a manner that would satisfy everyone, but all I see now are empty promises, contradictory statements, and invalid statistics, all under the guise of knowing what is best for the end user. I see no harm in compiling a list of questions that will hopefully pique the interest of end users while providing an outlet for voicing all of our concerns (here) over more finite details.

If the end user is the group with whom Mozilla is ultimately seeking to please, these questions need to be addressed where an end user takes notice.

[MeCasa]

I believe at this point we need a different approach. Simply asking Mozilla if they are abandoning themes in the near future, far future, or any future at all, is only leading to generic answers in an attempt to appease us. "XUL-based add-ons are not going anywhere in the foreseeable future" and "add-ons are here to stay" is a contradiction at best.

We should be asking more specific questions:

Why is the Mozilla organization actively working against it's own community, in this case, it's theming community?

Why are they are using every tactic they can to discredit and discourage themers?
Why are they hiding the Themes section at addons.mozilla.org?
Why are they stopping themes from working with Personas?
Why are they redirecting the Get Themes link to Personas?
Why are they spreading rumors of low usage? (See Frank Lion's post here)
Why are they spreading rumors of security scares with themes? (See Mike Connor's blog here)
Why are they over emphasizing the significance of a 3-second restart?
Why are they over emphasizing the version compatibility issue during updates?
Why is their ultimate goal to phase out themes in favor of Personas when in truth both systems can coexist as separate entities?
Why are they attempting to instill fear and uncertainty in both theme developers and general users?
Why are they making contradictory statements in an effort to quiet the outrage? (See The AMO team's blog here)
Why is this documented elsewhere as something set in stone? (See mozilla wiki here and Asa's blog here)

Why?

Cat Theif, you know the answers to all your questions. Mozilla apparently believes that the new direction will lead to more stability (especially during updates) for unsophisticated users.

The questions Themers/Extension devs should be asking is:

Does the new direction lead to more stability for users and is there an effective way to match stability under the current system?

Unknowledgeable users may only want standardized versions while knowledgeable users will always have options, after all the source is open. What may happen is users may be faced with a choice of customizable or uncustomizable versions of Firefox.

[WildcatRay]

We already know from our users that incompatible add-ons are a significant factor in opting out of updates.

Maybe I'm missing something, but shouldn't that statement show the Mozilla folks how important users feel extensions/themes are to them? If they're willing to forgo product updates to retain extension/theme functionality then I'd say that extensions/themes are pretty darn important to users. Thus, all the more reason for the Mozilla folks to embrace us with open arms rather than piss in our cornflakes.

(Not to snide, but) Arrogance? Elitism? Not invented here? Tired of (the browser) being blamed for something that is actually being caused by an extension and/or theme? Being embarrassed that they did not come up with a functionality and/or an uniquely original theme that someone did in their spare time?

Notice that they have never turned to the theme writers to come up with a new default theme. I suspect they only grudgingly add a functionality from an extension unless, of course, one of them used it as an extension first to test it out and gauge interest in it. Otherwise, I would think many of the functions of a popular extension like Tab Mix Plus would already be incorporated into the browser. Or, a reviled function like tab tearing would have a pref to disable it rather than having to install an extension to add it.

[Aronnax!]

The questions Themers/Extension devs should be asking is:

Does the new direction lead to more stability for users and is there an effective way to match stability under the current system?

Stability is only one part

Many developer have currently many different options about it - the leading included.

Some think it is a good idea to work later ONLY with a stable extension/theme API.
Some think it is better to have the freedom and creativity from the old system (XUL) and the pros from the new systems.

In particular is it reasonable to look from where Mozilla comes and what the completion use.

Chrome for example has only a stable, but as well limited API.
Mozilla has now a very open system and this has a few drawbacks, but as well many advantages.

Chrome for example will never have the same spread of extensions/themes as now Firefox.
You can do only what the API permit. XUL is there much more flexible.

The new systems are for sure more stable, but it has a price.
We will lost a lot of freedom, only with the new systems and for many is then Firefox not anymore Firefox.

Cheers

[patrickjdempsey]

Stability. Yes, that old saw. When I get a bug report of something not working, it's typically fixed within 48 hours. How many weeks or months it takes for that fix to be approved is completely out of my hands. What can be done about stability? Give themers and extension builders access to the review process in a meaningful way. I understand that reviewers are busy people but only a handful of times in 2 years have I gotten a review that said something more than "Thanks for the update, it looks great." On top of that, how about throwing us a bone and providing us with a default theme that actually works on multiple platforms for multiple versions with moz-appearance set to none as a backbone? With a stale framework to build off of and drawl fixes from, there would be a whole lot less to go wrong.

And what happens when they want to introduce more features into Personas? A new format? Are they going to push for forwards and backwards compatibility THEN? or are they going to follow the same model they have followed since the beginning by saying "If we want a new feature, we are going to use it no matter what it breaks over There."? It will be much more difficult to convince a fly-by-night developer who just threw something together for fun to update their work than someone who has dedicated years into it. (Not to say all or even most Personas designers are flakes, but the *anybody can do it* attitude certainly introduces the possibility of a good number of flakes.) Just look at Microsoft Word document format. There is a closed format that changes with every version that is almost never forwards compatible and only weakly backwards compatible. So no, a closed format does not mean more stable, in fact, it means that WHEN changes come, it's less flexible to those changes and things just flat out break.