A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Talk about code development, features, specific bugs, enhancements, patches, and similar things.
Forum rules
Please keep everything here strictly on-topic.
This board is meant for Pale Moon source code development related subjects only like code snippets, patches, specific bugs, git, the repositories, etc.

This is not for tech support! Please do not post tech support questions in the "Development" board!
Please make sure not to use this board for support questions. Please post issues with specific websites, extensions, etc. in the relevant boards for those topics.

Please keep things on-topic as this forum will be used for reference for Pale Moon development. Expect topics that aren't relevant as such to be moved or deleted.
Attronarch
Moonbather
Moonbather
Posts: 58
Joined: 2016-03-21, 12:35

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Attronarch » 2021-12-15, 13:39

farneyman wrote:
2021-12-15, 11:54
I'm not a coder, just an ordinary user, so being told simply: 'We broke all your extensions, so if that's a problem just write your own' was more than off-putting, that's the kind of arrogance I'd expect from Google, not people touting themselves as a 'community'.
Which isn't true, as they were communicating that for several years, whilst inviting the community to rise up and prepare for transition. Unfortunately, the latter hasn't happened.

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 35474
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: Motala, SE
Contact:

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Moonchild » 2021-12-15, 13:40

farneyman wrote:
2021-12-15, 11:54
'We broke all your extensions, so if that's a problem just write your own'
And we never said that. Nor did we break the add-ons. We just stopped already-unsupported legacy Firefox add-ons from being installed and that was nothing new or sudden or unannounced, even for "regular users". So that's a pretty exaggerated view.
sidology wrote:
2021-12-15, 12:26
Any plans for going with version 28 under the hood?
No. That would just complicate matters. The whole "Australis" thing was already addressed when 29 came out and that was solved quickly. We need a compromise here not a full turning back of the clock. We need to find a path that addresses both groups' concerns, not just one.
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite

User avatar
sidology
Moon lover
Moon lover
Posts: 79
Joined: 2021-12-04, 22:07

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by sidology » 2021-12-15, 14:21

Moonchild wrote:
2021-12-15, 13:40
We need to find a path that addresses both groups' concerns, not just one.
That makes sense :thumbup:

User avatar
somdcomputerguy
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 381
Joined: 2014-02-23, 17:25
Location: Greenbrier County, West Virginia
Contact:

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by somdcomputerguy » 2021-12-15, 14:39

I used to be infatuated with programming, I was proficient with about half a dozen or so different programming languages. For the past decade or so I've just been a plain 'ol user, but forking some extensions has been a (slowly) growing thought in my mind. Not just the few I've learned to live without, but others that I have no interest in or use of.
:cool: -bruce /* somdcomputerguy.com */
'If you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change.'

Michaell
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 282
Joined: 2018-05-26, 18:13

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Michaell » 2021-12-15, 16:34

Mostly a good plan. It would have been better if the poll had been worded like the results graph but that's over now. I am assuming the browser version will be 30 so I can go ahead and start editing extensions I've tweaked. Going back to pre-dual-GUID is a surprise but might be interesting and simpler once re-conversions are done.

Will the Add-ons Manager do any sort of version number checking? (what is acceptable for min and max?) And will the Add-ons site do the same or will it just be left up to the developer? I assume the current browser version screening on the Add-ons site will be dropped or at least less aggressive.

Good idea to drop Basilisk or let another dev have it. Maybe someone else will add some functionality that makes it worthwhile. I've kept it updated but really have no need for it now.
Win10home(1709), PM33.0.0-portable as of Feb 1, '24

User avatar
MoonWalker
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 31
Joined: 2020-10-13, 15:38

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by MoonWalker » 2021-12-15, 18:38

As I understand, the PM commitment was to keep and develop the same extension's technology than Firefox, not to maintain the existent extensions until the end of time. Is supposed that this commitment was in the interest of developers who were able to expand that extensions. But if that developers do not develop, why care about them?

Moreover, extensions are seen as a sort of toys (viewtopic.php?f=46&t=26816) instead of tools to improve browsing experience. Most popular, used and functional WebExtensions have a good or greater equivalent in the PM's extension framework. PM should be measured against current web trends, not against the environment of the compact disk era.

A "100% compatible with the Chrome-heavy developed web, feature-for-feature, with minimal breakage of websites" seems to me as a straw man sentence. I think nobody cares about 100% compatibility with Chrome, except that nobody wants that browsing become impossible due to Blink-based architecture. Actually, most users won't know why the site they are visiting breaks, they only will see a malfunctioning web page.

In my opinion, one thing is a "heavy developed web" and other is "Chrome/Google based web".

About the first one, the web browser as become the Jack of all trades of the digital era. A multitasking app is what the Web Browser was meant to be due to the logical evolution of the World Wide Web. With just getting internet connection you are able to open whatever app, work in it, save your progress live in the cloud and share your files with everyone. No matter what operating system do you use, neither the kind of device by what you are connecting to the web.
That is the reason why services like Google Docs, Canva, online video editors, or RollApp can exist with success. That kind of apps are not as powerful as dedicated native desktop software but for an average Jane does the job.
And that behavior is specific for the desktop environment where there is a one heavily used app (web browser) to access multiple services, instead of the mobile environment where there are many barely used apps to access each service.

In the other hand, the chromized web brings us back to the years when Internet Explorer used to rule the web. The internet was also hostile to another browsers, even to non Windows systems, but at least a website tailored to IE could remain functional for years without breaking. Probably the Googe's lack of commit with their own developments (https://killedbygoogle.com/) have caused that websites are prone to breaking.

The only solution to a chromized web is to extend the user base enough to be noticed by web designers and change the messy design patters by something that seems to adhere to standards.

Which of these two routes do you think would expand the PM user base?
  • Let me show you an amazing, fully customizable browser that does not display correctly many popular websites.
  • Let me show you an amazing, fully customizable browser that does not fully support Firefox legacy extensions.

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 35474
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: Motala, SE
Contact:

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Moonchild » 2021-12-15, 19:56

MoonWalker wrote:
2021-12-15, 18:38
As I understand, the PM commitment was to keep and develop the same extension's technology than Firefox, not to maintain the existent extensions until the end of time.
However, it seems that 40% of the user base wants e4xactly that, so yeah, that's why this has been a tough thing to find a solution for.
Which of these two routes do you think would expand the PM user base?

Let me show you an amazing, fully customizable browser that does not display correctly many popular websites.

Let me show you an amazing, fully customizable browser that does not fully support Firefox legacy extensions.
The survey shows that the PM user base by majority wants Firefox legacy extension support over compatibility with the googlified web.
MoonWalker wrote:
2021-12-15, 18:38
Moreover, extensions are seen as a sort of toys (viewtopic.php?f=46&t=26816) instead of tools to improve browsing experience.
Clearly they are not, when it comes down to it.
MoonWalker wrote:
2021-12-15, 18:38
I think nobody cares about 100% compatibility with Chrome
Except from you because of what you stated above.
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite

Lucio Chiappetti
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 654
Joined: 2014-09-01, 15:11
Location: Milan Italy

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Lucio Chiappetti » 2021-12-15, 22:52

First of all thanks a lot to Moonchild for all effort done so far, and also for the way the user community "wishes" are taken into account. :thumbup:

It took me a while to find time to read carefully this thread, and I'm throwing in some of my feelings (the value of which could be less than a fraction of eurocent).
To make the reply more compact I quote words or sentences from Moonchild's post in this colour.

MC: Trying to come up with a way to satisfy the two, almost equally-sized, large groups of the users wanting mutually exclusive things (wanting a sane, minimal compromise, secure browser vs. wanting an unchanging web client that preserves maximum compatibility with the Mozilla legacy)
I did not feel those two as so mutually exclusive and was uncertain for which of the two to vote ...

MC: The legend is slightly different from the answers on the survey which were kept somewhat cryptic on purpose to avoid any obvious bias to the question. [...]
The other two choices being split as they are does, however, cause a major issue for which I had to find a solution.

May be this intended crypticity (is it the right word?) was why I voted in the 39% ... I do not use that many extensions (one reason could be that I could not be sure of their future support, so I do not want to get used to something I start using just for fun). On the new home machine (it won't be much different on the institute one) I have 9 extensions active (of which 3 I may have forgotten why I installed them) and 4 disabled (one of which is FEBE) ... of which I consider essential to have are NoSquint (see below), Expire history by days (simple and silent), password editor and session manager (simple and used often), and a working off-the-shelf ad blocker (complex and should work silently).

On the other hand as reason for my vote would be that I like a stable and customizable user interface (whether achieved via an extension or intrinsical stability of the software is sort of irrelevant). I came to Pale Moon when Firefox moved to Australis, and learned about extensions only later (or about). This is something I prize a lot in software ... for instance the first things I install on a new machine are (and at least the first four are open source stuff whose developers are very responsive to their user community):
  • Pale Moon as a browser and import my profile
  • the fvwm window manager and my config
  • my editor of choice, THE (The Hessling Editor), a very customizable clone of the old IBM mainframe XEDIT :mrgreen:
  • the alpine mail user agent
  • I also install an Apache web server and a mysql lookalike, currently MariaDB
  • For text processing and slides I tend to use LaTeX in preference to LibreOffice
MC: As some of you may have noticed, FUEL was restored. So, FEBE and NoSquint
FEBE and NoSquint are complex extensions which do lot of things (apart from FUEL which I ignored what it was), so very intimidating for the user-potential-forker. FEBE never worked easily and it is simpler for me to make a copy of the profile directory. NoSquint was however what I considered essential and which kept me so far from upgrading from 29.4.1 (at home, slightly earlier at office), I guess that will be my homework for the coming holidays :D

MC: Lack of participation in the extension ecosystem by users. Unlike what happened in the heyday of Mozilla, current users apparently feel underqualified to even try
Yes ... also I think there are no tutorials or API description useful for starters.
On the other hand extensions do more complex things (a browser is a more complex piece of s/w than a window manager, an editor or a mail user agent ?) than an "user customization". I have (not with an immediate learning curve) customized fvwm (let us say "my desktop" even if it is a bit less), written my macros for the THE editor, customized the look and feel for alpine (that and fvwm work with a single rc file). And such customization one does it for himself. May make it public, or make suggestions on a support mailing list but with no guarantee for other users.

MC: Not enough core developers.
That would not be a problem for stable software (alpine and THE are essentially one-man-factories) but the point is that one has a stable software when the environment around is stable (for an editor the only "new thing" is Unicode support, for a mailer could be newer authentication ways), but the Web environment is complex and changing ... so intimidating, requires continuous effort by many very skilled persons ! A browser cannot be stable, unfortunately.

MC: rejection of our web clients for WebRTC
Personally I have no problem of using Chrome only for Google Meet or Zoom conferences, or the rare cases when access to a Gsuite thing cannot be done via Pale Moon (Gsuite was my institution choice) ... if they track me for using their stuff who cares, the rest I do without them.
Concerning YT it is not one of my primary goals, but I can use Pale Moon without problems with YT to look at seminars or conferences. The point would be why academic institutions would want to use YT instead of other open tools like BigBlueButton, or for instance GARR TV (the streaming system of the Italian Academic Network), and the answer is simple ... manpower ... not enough central manpower to provide it as a service, and not enough manpower to run on the learning curve in the local structures. But this is going off topic ...

Anyhow, please go on being unreasonable (see my .sig) ! :clap:
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. (G.B. Shaw)

User avatar
MoonWalker
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 31
Joined: 2020-10-13, 15:38

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by MoonWalker » 2021-12-15, 22:58

Moonchild wrote:
2021-12-15, 19:56
The survey shows that the PM user base by majority wants Firefox legacy extension support over compatibility with the googlified web.
That is undoubtedly true. I was talking about expand the user base, I mean increase market share.

New Tobin Paradigm

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2021-12-15, 23:13

So wait a god damned minute? You are telling me, and everyone else, that we are switching back to Firefox's ID AND you restored a pointless pre-jetpack abstraction layer from the late 2000s?! Reversing every major decision we have collectively made and I fought hard for in the past 7 years? Not only do you do this based on a redundant poll because I already RAN ONE but post this GRAND announcement the day I go for dental surgery let alone a week and a half before I move?!

What in the ACTUAL FUCK?! Oh and I suppose it is up to me to scrap my on-going projects for a radical change in direction I was never consulted on nor would EVER agree to JUST to appease fuckin morons? I am totally not in favor of reverting the massive amount of progress simply because of THEM. Nor am I a fan of YET ANOTHER fucking unilateral decision being made when I am suddenly not around. If you recall when you reverted ABL 3.5 back to shitty 3.0 code the MOMENT you go your hands on it because of boo hoo mah startup time as JUST one example.. Un-fucking believable.

I need more pills and will return once I have had some more time to process this monumental pile of horseshit.

User avatar
Kris_88
Keeps coming back
Keeps coming back
Posts: 933
Joined: 2021-01-26, 11:18

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Kris_88 » 2021-12-15, 23:31

You swear so cool! )))
I will learn... )))

Sablesword
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 18
Joined: 2017-04-01, 06:50

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Sablesword » 2021-12-16, 00:48

I don't see how switching back to the FireFox GUID will be useful. Editing the install.rdf file so that the current version of PM will load the extension is easy - easy enough that even a feels-underqualified-to-even-try extension coding user like me can easily do it. It's also a band aid, and as Moonchild and others have noted, it will do nothing to fix any problems in the underlying javascript or other code.

I'm no wizard of coding, but it looks to me like switching back to the FireFox GUID is just a band aid of a different color. It might make the easy part even easier for users who feel underqualified but it won't help with the hard parts of updating extensions and it won't help people like me feel less underqualified.

From where I sit, Moonchild has greatly underestimated just how difficult it is to create or update an extension. What would help is a complete idiots baby steps for dummies guide to creating an extension, to the current Pale Moon API for extensions, and to the differences between the current Pale Moon API and the old FireFox API targeted by those legacy FireFox extensions.

Michaell
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 282
Joined: 2018-05-26, 18:13

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Michaell » 2021-12-16, 01:35

Sablesword wrote:
2021-12-16, 00:48
I don't see how switching back to the FireFox GUID will be useful.
It would mean extensions from CAA could be tried without editing. Of course they may not work.

But this reminds me...does the new plan mean the rumored change to a replacement for RDF is off the table? Not much point in editing right now if RDF is still planned for replacement.
Win10home(1709), PM33.0.0-portable as of Feb 1, '24

Pause
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 41
Joined: 2021-08-19, 10:05

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Pause » 2021-12-16, 03:27

It seems I missed the part that GUIDs in extensions would be going back to the pre-dual-GUID form, so never included that in my previous reply. I thought it was simply a matter of allowing Old Firefox/Legacy extensions to install on Pale Moon again even if they don't have a Pale Moon GUID in it (with it not being Pale Moon's responsibility if it doesn't work due to changes in Pale Moon's code compared to what the extension expects of course).

I think Pale Moon should keep its own GUID, and that if you're going to allow the Old Firefox/Legacy extension support it should be a matter of just having the dual-GUID support in place again for the browser.

As for the FUEL stuff, hopefully it'll be something that can be removed again at some point in the future if superior forks/replacements (namely ones that don't need to use FUEL) of those extensions using it ever happen.

I don't think it should result in any changes whatsoever to APMO, that any submissions to APMO should still require the inclusion of the Pale Moon GUID and still have the other rules/requirements/restrictions that were already in place.

van p
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 592
Joined: 2015-11-19, 07:15
Location: Cincinnati, OH, U.S.A.

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by van p » 2021-12-16, 05:35

For what little this is worth, let me ramble.

A few years ago, I got into Pale Moon, Waterfox, and Cyberfox because I wanted a browser that wasn't corporate, didn't spy on me, and wasn't M$ (nuff said), Google (arrogant, bully), or Firefox (THE browser everybody used, so I wanted something different, even if it was based on Firefox). I'm not a programmer and don't know an extension from a backhoe or a GUID from a Druid.

I didn't vote in the poll because there were a lot of options, I didn't really know how to decide, I didn't want to spend a lot of time thinking about it, and I figured my one vote wouldn't make a difference anyway. Other than the criteria I mentioned above, I guess I just want something that works, at least most of the time (it doesn't have to be 'perfect' like Chrome). Since I'm not on the computer 25/8 and my online life doesn't revolve around extensions, I guess I can live with whatever somebody comes up with. If others have to hang up their computer because they can't get the extensions that make their online life all perfecty, so be it.

Not sure if this is off-topic, but I guess I'll close by asking how Brave came on the scene and in no time people were just orgasmic about it?

Thanks.
Windows 10 Pro x64 v22H2 8GB i5-4570|Pale Moon v33.0.1 x64

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 35474
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: Motala, SE
Contact:

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Moonchild » 2021-12-16, 06:55

New Tobin Paradigm wrote:
2021-12-15, 23:13
You are telling me, and everyone else, that we are switching back to Firefox's ID AND you restored a pointless pre-jetpack abstraction layer from the late 2000s?! Reversing every major decision we have collectively made and I fought hard for in the past 7 years?
Really now!? You're equating this with the total of all the work we've been doing? You're being rather disingenuous here (boy, do I have to use that term a lot lately...). Conveniently forgetting all the core work that's been done that isn't directly related to extensions. Even sticking to extensions... you want to talk about "every major decision we've collectively made"? Then you should also include the decision about WebExtensions that was a hard choice you gave me, if you recall. I wouldn't call that particular even a collective decision, but a compromise.
Not sure if you've been paying attention in the past months but that pointless abstraction layer is actually something that has become part of our legacy, and as far as I can tell it's been one decision that didn't have me involved because I was fine with it being there, even if I did the removal work after YOU decided it should go and I trusted your judgement on that one since you did a lot of the extension organisation work - I've seen the fallout from it. Are you blind to it?
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:
2021-12-15, 23:13
Not only do you do this based on a redundant poll because I already RAN ONE
So you think you could have predicted the outcome of this redundant poll, you say? I think that's a bunch of BS.
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:
2021-12-15, 23:13
I suppose it is up to me to scrap my on-going projects for a radical change in direction I was never consulted on nor would EVER agree to JUST to appease fuckin morons?
They are your projects. I'm not going to scrap them for you. Besides, I haven't seen any work done for it yet so they were just plans, as far as I can tell. And congratulations, you just called 40% of our user base (and over half if you discount the percentage that actually want Firefox or Chrome) "fucking morons". That's a bit too far, Tobin.
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:
2021-12-15, 23:13
Nor am I a fan of YET ANOTHER fucking unilateral decision being made when I am suddenly not around. If you recall when you reverted ABL 3.5 back to shitty 3.0 code the MOMENT you go your hands on it because of boo hoo mah startup time as JUST one example.. Un-fucking believable.
Last time I checked the way Pale Moon handles Pale Moon extensions is still dealing with MY application. So you're telling me I should give up control over not only UXP but also my application building on it? I can make as many "unilateral" decisions as I want about Pale Moon, and I won't let you take that away from me as well. In fact, you should think long and hard about what you're doing here.
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:
2021-12-15, 23:13
I need more pills and will return once I have had some more time to process this monumental pile of horseshit.
Yeah drug yourself up and get some rest. Maybe you'll have a better working brain when you come back.
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite

User avatar
H Seldon
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 23
Joined: 2021-05-21, 01:30

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by H Seldon » 2021-12-16, 07:21

It's nice to know that "Your browser, Your way" still means something.
Wenn ist das Nunstück git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 35474
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: Motala, SE
Contact:

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Moonchild » 2021-12-16, 12:25

Sablesword wrote:
2021-12-16, 00:48
From where I sit, Moonchild has greatly underestimated just how difficult it is to create or update an extension. What would help is a complete idiots baby steps for dummies guide to creating an extension, to the current Pale Moon API for extensions, and to the differences between the current Pale Moon API and the old FireFox API targeted by those legacy FireFox extensions.
No, I haven't. Instead, I think everyone who is complaining has been overestimating the difficulty to create or update an extension.
A complete guide? That has never existed for anyone, yet thousands of regular Firefox users had no problem creating and maintaining the extensions that were created, many of them from scratch (which is hardly ever needed here, in fact). What is available now is thousands of examples in older extensions, and a copy of MDN in UDN graciously maintained by a community member if you need the references. That is actually the same or more than original extension developers had.
Sablesword wrote:
2021-12-16, 00:48
I don't see how switching back to the FireFox GUID will be useful.
It makes the threshold for using legacy Firefox extensions on Pale Moon as low as possible. Extensions regularly also have GUIDs weaved into their JS code or XUL manifests, especially if they were made for multiple target applications which quite a few were. It's better to have it "just work" than to have to hunt for those things, especially if someone is just starting out with extension coding based on a legacy Firefox one, and the thing not working discouraging them from looking any further.
The own GUID has always been primarily for Pale Moon extensions. If it is going to be a matter of wanting maximum compatibility with extensions for as long as possible, then having the Firefox GUID is essential. It goes beyond just install.rdf
Pause wrote:
2021-12-16, 03:27
As for the FUEL stuff, hopefully it'll be something that can be removed again at some point in the future if superior forks/replacements (namely ones that don't need to use FUEL) of those extensions using it ever happen.
It's not going to happen. It's been clear over the past 10 years that this kind of thing won't be changed unless people are forced to make the change. And people being forced to make the change didn't work, either, as the past months have shown. Instead there has just been a lot of negativity, we're apparently "arrogant" for wanting to complete what we set out to do years ago, etc. so... The only real way I can think of is let the community deal with extensions, period, and since we're the only up-to-date browser supporting Firefox XUL overlay and bootstrapped extensions anyway at this point, it doesn't actually make a difference and dual-GUID would just complicate matters. All of that was supposed to be transitional; moving forward that should not come back.
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite

User avatar
RealityRipple
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 647
Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
Contact:

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by RealityRipple » 2021-12-16, 13:44

Out of all the extensions I manage (currently just under 40, public and private), Fierr's the only one that's going to be negatively affected by the Application ID change at a functional level, as I show a unique error page for each application using chrome.manifest directives. And objectively, switching to application-specific releases for Fierr would reduce the extension size significantly.

User avatar
Al6bus
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 288
Joined: 2015-08-24, 14:55
Location: Lemberg

Re: A change of direction for Pale Moon in 2022

Unread post by Al6bus » 2021-12-16, 15:54

Off-topic:
Moonchild wrote:
2021-12-14, 14:59
On the longer term (and not yet set in stone at this point) we may organize things differently and give this whole Open Source collaboration another shot, but that's stuff we'll have to think about next year. It simply can't be that the current world literally has no genuine cooperation any more; I refuse to believe that, so call it a hope or prayer or what have you that this increasing tribalism will take a back seat again.
maybe a little unban and peace in honor of this event? if you know what I mean)
Windows 7 Pro x64 - Pale Moon x64
We hope for multiprocessing

Locked