Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
-
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: October 1st, 2014, 3:25 pm
Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/2017
How will this affect extensions in SeaMonkey?
How will this affect extensions in SeaMonkey?
-
- Posts: 1361
- Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
Webextensions are currently not working in SeaMonkey. This might also need E10s support to work properly. Last I looked there were at least around 5MB sourcecode in FF needed for this to work and also many changes in the browser itself.
While I think that Firefox will likely be dead soon afterwards if this and Theme removal goes thru as planned it won't help SeaMonkey. If no more devs show up willing to contribute it might mean the end of SeaMonkey after a possible 2.50 ESR. So to all enjoy it while it lasts or try to help out.
FRG
While I think that Firefox will likely be dead soon afterwards if this and Theme removal goes thru as planned it won't help SeaMonkey. If no more devs show up willing to contribute it might mean the end of SeaMonkey after a possible 2.50 ESR. So to all enjoy it while it lasts or try to help out.
FRG
-
- Posts: 8779
- Joined: May 7th, 2007, 12:07 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
There is no ESR for SeaMonkey. Why remove themes? They improve the appearance of the application so much.
- Frank Lion
- Posts: 21178
- Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
- Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
It is the 'this' that is the big problem.frg wrote:... if this and Theme removal goes thru as planned it won't help SeaMonkey.
The Theme side is a non-problem, Firefox...and thus SM, could drop Complete Themes tomorrow and Pat and I could have our SM themes back up as .xpis within 90 minutes. Even other existing themes would only take a few days or maybe a week to recode to do that.
The demise of XUL and extensions though, would present a far greater problem, probably terminal.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)
.
.
-
- Posts: 1361
- Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
>> There is no ESR for SeaMonkey.
It is being considered just to keep XP and Vista support for a while longer. And our good friends at Mozilla breaking the source tree almost daily now and not all changes are what I would call logical...
>> Why remove themes?
They are bad for your health
>> They improve the appearance of the application so much.
Chrome doesn't have them so why should Firefox. They distract from the beautiful rounded tabs and flat buttons.
FRG
It is being considered just to keep XP and Vista support for a while longer. And our good friends at Mozilla breaking the source tree almost daily now and not all changes are what I would call logical...
>> Why remove themes?
They are bad for your health
>> They improve the appearance of the application so much.
Chrome doesn't have them so why should Firefox. They distract from the beautiful rounded tabs and flat buttons.
FRG
- JodyThornton
- Posts: 153
- Joined: August 12th, 2004, 5:59 pm
- Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario (Canada)
- Contact:
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
Maybe SeaMonkey devs will just implement Gecko 57 and that will become SeaMonkey 3? Perhaps.
Cheers,
Jody Thornton
(Richmond Hill, Ontario)
Jody Thornton
(Richmond Hill, Ontario)
-
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: October 1st, 2014, 3:25 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
Yeah, but they're basically already on track for that. Unfortunately it's not that simple.JodyThornton wrote:Maybe SeaMonkey devs will just implement Gecko 57 and that will become SeaMonkey 3? Perhaps.
Gecko is not Firefox. Gecko is only the backend code. Firefox and SeaMonkey are two different "front-end" code bases for it. So SeaMonkey already implements Gecko.
But some of WebExtensions is currently specific to Firefox.
This means, SeaMonkey will have to port that code over. But as said, there are many other, prerequisite changes that SeaMonkey would need to make first - http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... #p14722291
That is why this is a concern and why people are using phrases like 'might mean the end' and 'big problem'.
- JodyThornton
- Posts: 153
- Joined: August 12th, 2004, 5:59 pm
- Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario (Canada)
- Contact:
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
Oh hey I hear ya! I thought SeaMonkey was doomed awhile ago (sadly too because I think it's a great browser suite). But even looking at how long it's taking to get an updated finished new version out gives a bad sign. So WebExtensions is just like bad dried out icing on top of stale cake
Cheers,
Jody Thornton
(Richmond Hill, Ontario)
Jody Thornton
(Richmond Hill, Ontario)
- Frank Lion
- Posts: 21178
- Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
- Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
Not really. That had nothing to do with development - http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... #p14718031JodyThornton wrote:But even looking at how long it's taking to get an updated finished new version out gives a bad sign.
SM will be fine, it's just that people from outside just aren't used to seeing stuff written honestly as here, but always with the best spin put on everything. I find the SM dev approach to things very refreshing and don't give a damn what bad signs or otherwise it gives out.
...or not port the code over. Those WebExtensions will not be adding anything of value to SM and can be safely ignored, I reckon.barbaz wrote:...But some of WebExtensions is currently specific to Firefox.
This means, SeaMonkey will have to port that code over
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)
.
.
-
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: October 1st, 2014, 3:25 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
... and thus lose all extensions support?Frank Lion wrote:...or not port the code overbarbaz wrote:...But some of WebExtensions is currently specific to Firefox.
This means, SeaMonkey will have to port that code over
Compared to "traditional" extensions, yes.Frank Lion wrote:Those WebExtensions [...] can be safely ignored, I reckon.
Compared to no extensions at all, which appears to be the alternative here, ignoring this doesn't sound so safe, does it?
- Frank Lion
- Posts: 21178
- Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
- Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
...which is why SM continuing with XUL would be a 'good thing'.barbaz wrote:... and thus lose all extensions support?Frank Lion wrote:...or not port the code overbarbaz wrote:...But some of WebExtensions is currently specific to Firefox.
This means, SeaMonkey will have to port that code over
If SM's sole ambition in the future is only to be a bit less worthless than Firefox, then it's going to end in tears.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)
.
.
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: March 27th, 2010, 6:48 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
No extensions = first release of Microsoft Edge... no thanks.
Tower: HP EliteDesk 705 G3 - Win 10 Pro - AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 1500 - 64GB (4x16GB) 2133MHz DDR4 - Fox 77.0.1/TB 68.9/Edge 83.0
Laptop: HP ZBook 17 G4 - Win 10 Pro for Workstations - Intel Xeon E3-1535M - 64GB (4x16GB) 2400MHz DDR4 - Fox 77.0.1/TB 68.9/Edge 83.0
Laptop: HP ZBook 17 G4 - Win 10 Pro for Workstations - Intel Xeon E3-1535M - 64GB (4x16GB) 2400MHz DDR4 - Fox 77.0.1/TB 68.9/Edge 83.0
- DJGM
- Posts: 713
- Joined: November 9th, 2002, 10:28 am
- Location: Manchester, England, UK.
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
If Mozilla is ultimately planning to kill off Gecko/XUL, couldn't The SeaMonkey Council do what the Pale Moon
developers did ... fork it, and continue regardless of whatever Chrome-clone direction Firefox goes for?
It's open-source, so surely anyone who knows how to, can fork it any go their own way with it!
(It's a shame Pale Moon forked from what is now a very outdated version of Gecko.)
developers did ... fork it, and continue regardless of whatever Chrome-clone direction Firefox goes for?
It's open-source, so surely anyone who knows how to, can fork it any go their own way with it!
(It's a shame Pale Moon forked from what is now a very outdated version of Gecko.)
-
- Posts: 270
- Joined: January 20th, 2015, 12:29 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
The current version of Pale Moon updated its core to a fork of Gecko 38, for what that's worth. And I've been able to compile a frankenstein-ish SeaMonkey 2.35 using Pale Moon's source as the mozilla/ folder.
I'll keep using regular SeaMonkey for as long as it keeps compiling, but it's nice to have a hypothetical backup option, I suppose.
I'll keep using regular SeaMonkey for as long as it keeps compiling, but it's nice to have a hypothetical backup option, I suppose.
-
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: October 1st, 2014, 3:25 pm
Re: Gecko 57 to kill "traditional" extensions?
That has been discussed before - http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic ... #p14435693DJGM wrote:If Mozilla is ultimately planning to kill off Gecko/XUL, couldn't The SeaMonkey Council do what the Pale Moon
developers did ... fork it, and continue regardless of whatever Chrome-clone direction Firefox goes for?