Important: Firefox 1.1 Extension Changes

mcm_ham · Post by **mcm_ham** » March 2nd, 2005, 1:51 am

Benjamin Smedbergs wrote:The new flat chrome manifests are currently not usable by extensions because the
manifest is overwritten while doing compatibility. This patch makes sure that we
upgrade/delete/manage the chrome.manifest files in an extension properly such
that extensions can include a chrome.manifest in the root of their XPI.

Fixed on trunk. Updated documentation is at
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/ex...extensions.html

I could use help spreading the word about this checkin amongst extension
authors. My blog is down from having moved websites and not configured the new
one yet.

Post by **BenBasson** » March 2nd, 2005, 4:03 am

If chrome.rdf is still supported for backwards compatibility, does that mean there's no need to implement the new version if our extension supports prior versions of Firefox? That's the conclusion that I've drawn, but if there's a good reason to switch over then I will.

mcm_ham · Post by **mcm_ham** » March 2nd, 2005, 4:18 am

"If chrome.manifest is missing, the extension manager will generate one from the old em:file property and contents.rdf files."

I think you are correct. Although if you bundle both the chrome.rdf and the chrome.manifest files that should support both versions. A bit like how many extensions have install.rdf and install.js files packaged. I guess that depends on whether having the <em:file> property in the install.rdf forces it into old style even if the chrome.manifest file is there, but from the quote it doesn't seem that's the case.