| 1 |
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Danny YUE wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 2017-09-08 00:48, Adam Carter <adamcarter3@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Danny YUE <sheepduke@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>>> Hi all, |
| 7 |
>>>> |
| 8 |
>>>> I have been using FoxyProxy in Firefox for a really long time, until |
| 9 |
>>>> today I found its new version really sucks. |
| 10 |
>>>> |
| 11 |
>>>> Then I read the comment from author who declared that the old version |
| 12 |
>>>> can *only* be used before (roughly) end of 2017 before Firefox 57 and in |
| 13 |
>>>> new version some features must perish. |
| 14 |
>>>> |
| 15 |
>>> I am assuming that most actively developed addons will be updated before 57 |
| 16 |
>>> drops, so the transition wont be too painful. Is the issue you're having |
| 17 |
>>> with FoxyProxy related to it relying on features that are no longer |
| 18 |
>>> available under the new framework? |
| 19 |
>> Yes. The FoxyProxy author declared that some features are no long |
| 20 |
>> available under the new framework. |
| 21 |
>> I am really depressed about it because I just use that plugin every time |
| 22 |
>> I use Firefox. |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>>> This update will break my favorite extension, Vimperator. I am already |
| 26 |
>>> looking at replacements for Firefox due to this. So far I have found |
| 27 |
>>> qutebrowser which isn't really as featureful. |
| 28 |
>>> |
| 29 |
>>> R0b0t1. |
| 30 |
>> I am using Keysnail, no idea whether or not it will be deprecated. |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
>> If the features I want are blocked by the new framework, I'm afraid I |
| 33 |
>> would lock the version (fortunately it's Gentoo) for a long time, until |
| 34 |
>> I find replacement for plugins, or even Firefox... |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> Danny |
| 37 |
>> |
| 38 |
>> |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> It's been mentioned before in other threads recently, have you looked at |
| 42 |
> Palemoon? I have it installed here from a overlay. I haven't checked |
| 43 |
> on it recently but if this new plugin thing with Firefox leaves some of |
| 44 |
> my plugins unusable, I may be looking at some other options myself. I |
| 45 |
> might add, Seamonkey is stepping on a nerve or two of mine as well. |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> I've been wondering about this plugin thing myself since I heard about |
| 48 |
> it a few weeks ago. Sort of glad to see a discussion about it. Hoping |
| 49 |
> to find out what others think this is going to end up looking like. |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
Palemoon is a good mention. As I've expressed previously on |
| 53 |
gentoo-user, I was concerned about using it due to the slow |
| 54 |
application of security patches. Someone responded that this is no |
| 55 |
longer the case. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
If anyone has time to join some of the Mozilla mailing lists I think |
| 59 |
it would be worth it to ask them about their decisions. They seem to |
| 60 |
be making most of their choices without user input. To be fair, I |
| 61 |
doubt there are many users on the development mailing lists. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
In this case I actually think switching to WebExtensions addons is the |
| 64 |
start of a good idea as I can see some of the benefit, but asking that |
| 65 |
plans for adding back some of the now missing API be created sounds |
| 66 |
like a good idea. |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
Hopefully I will have time to do this myself, but if anybody gets to |
| 69 |
it before me that would be appreciated. I am extremely busy now. I'm |
| 70 |
suggesting this here because it seems like people here will be |
| 71 |
affected and know enough to hold a conversation with the developers |
| 72 |
who are making decisions. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
My personal experience with Mozilla is that no one is authorized to |
| 75 |
make changes. So why are there changes? |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
Cheers, |
| 78 |
R0b0t1 |
Archives