Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Users and developers helping users with generic and technical Pale Moon issues on all operating systems.

Moderator: trava90

Forum rules
This board is for technical/general usage questions and troubleshooting for the Pale Moon browser only.
Technical issues and questions not related to the Pale Moon browser should be posted in other boards!
Please keep off-topic and general discussion out of this board, thank you!
ineuw

Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by ineuw » 2018-02-17, 21:32

There are several very useful "legacy" extensions available on the Firefox add-ons site, but they are based on Jetpack/SDK and cannot be installed in Pale Moon. Can someone in the know tell me why? Thanks in advance.

New Tobin Paradigm

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2018-02-17, 21:38

Because they aren't Pale Moon extensions. Currently Jetpack extensions need to be Pale Moon extensions according to PMKit hacks in order to be installable.. This would obviously imply it has been made functionally compatible with Pale Moon..

However, it is being considered that in the future this restriction will be lifted and Jetpack extensions will simply be treated as any other non-Pale Moon targeted Firefox extension which exist in a limbo state of "it might work, it might not, it may cause your microwave to merge with your blender and eat your cat".

For more detailed info on the trouble with Jetpack, search the forums... We will let you know what our pending decision is regarding Jetpack for the future when it is made though.
Last edited by New Tobin Paradigm on 2018-02-17, 21:41, edited 5 times in total.

JustOff

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by JustOff » 2018-02-17, 21:59

New Tobin Paradigm wrote:We will let you know what our pending decision is regarding Jetpack for the future when it is made though.
I just hope this will be preceded by an open public discussion and the final decision will be made taking into account the real needs of users. So far I will not give any specific arguments, because I don't think it's the right place and time.
Last edited by JustOff on 2018-02-17, 22:06, edited 1 time in total.

New Tobin Paradigm

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2018-02-17, 22:22

It's leaning heavily toward, screw it let them be installable.. If they don't work then whatever, fork and make it a Pale Moon extension.. Else, limbo state like every other non-Pale Moon targeted Firefox extension.

The biggest barrier of course is that in UXP, Jetpack MUST stay 100% compatible with Basilisk.. That means it will need some additions or conditional code for Pale Moon and other more traditional XUL Applications rather than the focused Australis-class bs.. I would hope we can count on your help JustOff to make that happen. Remember, that we CAN totally do code changes on a conditional basis with the preprocessor but there cannot be any compromises when it comes to Basilisk compatibility or devtools interoperability.

There is also the aspect that current Pale Moon jetpack extensions will most likely have to be updated for the UXP Jetpack version.. But that would have to happen either way.. Still, jetpack, like devtools, is a fact.. And the artificial barrier is just getting in the way and is singling out jetpack, drawing more attention to it.. Still want to push for traditional or bootstrap extensions for Pale Moon but at least theoretically increasing our Add-on Compatibility even on an as-is basis can only be a good thing in a soon to be post-AMO world.

And now everyone is caught up on the discussion.

Here is a bombshell though, this.. was my idea... I'll see you all once you pick yourselves up off the floor.
Last edited by New Tobin Paradigm on 2018-02-17, 22:33, edited 14 times in total.

JustOff

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by JustOff » 2018-02-17, 23:15

New Tobin Paradigm wrote:The biggest barrier of course is that in UXP, Jetpack MUST stay 100% compatible with Basilisk.. That means it will need some additions or conditional code for Pale Moon and other more traditional XUL Applications rather than the focused Australis-class bs.. I would hope we can count on your help JustOff to make that happen.
You can confidently rely on me in this task, I think I already know how to make universal Jetpack that is compatible with both Basilisk and Pale Moon. All I need is the solid working set of Add-on SDK modules at the standard `resource://gre/modules/commonjs/` path.
we CAN totally do code changes on a conditional basis with the preprocessor
This makes the situation even simpler.
There is also the aspect that current Pale Moon jetpack extensions will most likely have to be updated for the UXP Jetpack version..
No! The most remarkable thing here is that all the current Pale Moon add-ons made using PMkit will automatically and by default be compatible with a specially prepared Jetpack from UPX without the need for any changes.
at least theoretically increasing our Add-on Compatibility even on an as-is basis can only be a good thing in a soon to be post-AMO world.
I recently discovered that many add-ons made using WebExtensions can be very easily adapted to Jetpack/PMkit and this is another reason why today the support of this technology, with all its shortcomings, is even more important than a year ago.

New Tobin Paradigm

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2018-02-18, 05:46

Resource regisrty is where it needs to be.. Do note that UXP has two Add-on Managers the Tycho one and the WebExtension infected one and no webex support code will be available to Pale Moon.. I hope your adaptation idea doesn't rely on that.
Last edited by New Tobin Paradigm on 2018-02-18, 05:47, edited 1 time in total.

JustOff

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by JustOff » 2018-02-18, 17:36

New Tobin Paradigm wrote:I hope your adaptation idea doesn't rely on that.
No, it doesn't.

Please let me know when I can start building Pale Moon from UXP repo so I can begin work on this task. I'm also ready to join at an earlier stage if necessary.

New Tobin Paradigm

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2018-02-18, 18:13

That.. will be a while yet.. Given the whole Take 2 rebase.. Watch the UXP Repo (not moebius).. I think you will be able to tell when that starts happening. ;)

Fredgs

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by Fredgs » 2018-02-28, 22:35

Hello,

I'm stuck for over a year now on Palemoon version 26.5.0, the last version which allows the installation of addons using JetPack. Now Palemoon does not work as wel on all sites because it is becoming too old a version. Can you please, pretty please, allow extensions using JetPack, preferably supported, but if no other choice, then allow them to be installed unsupported.
I am using privacy extensions such as Ghostery, BetterPrivacy, uBlock, No Google Analytics, etc., none of which can be installed under Palemoon 27.0 or newer because they use JetPack.

Thank-you!

New Tobin Paradigm

Re: Jetpack/SDK extensions?

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2018-03-01, 00:13

uBlock pre-WebExtension is bootstrap not jetpack.. I suspect a few of those also aren't jetpack either.. Throw them through the validator on the Add-ons Site to get an indication.

Regardless, the situation as-is will remain in Pale Moon 27.. This discussion is about Pale Moon on UXP which will be Pale Moon 28.

It also doesn't mean all jetpack extensions will suddenly start working.. In fact many more will be broken .. The price you pay for the terrible jetpack technology.. Just we won't be wholesale blocking unmodifed Firefox jetpack extensions..
Last edited by New Tobin Paradigm on 2018-03-01, 00:14, edited 1 time in total.

Locked