You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
9 points

Didn’t they remove XUL extensions to make their extension interface compatible with inferior chrome web extensions?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I just did a quick online search and it seems like the reason for removing that was that it was way too much work to maintain and stopped them from implementing performance improvements for Firefox. Apparently it was also a lot of work for extension developers, since they had to update their extensions constantly.

That’s just what I read tho, I wasn’t there when XUL extensions where still a thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yes, after twenty years of refusing to stabilize any part of that interface.

Chrome is absolutely the villain in this context. But Mozilla has been fucking itself over since the single-digit version numbers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

i wouldn’t say inferior… mozilla extensions were more performant and flexible, web extensions (ie the initial chrome format - now a standard that most browsers use) are easier to develop, and thus there were a lot more of them

permalink
report
parent
reply

Firefox

!firefox@lemmy.ml

Create post

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

Community stats

  • 2.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 939

    Posts

  • 18K

    Comments

Community moderators