Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
Moderator: Basilisk-Dev
-
- Apollo supporter
- Posts: 44
- Joined: 2018-01-20, 23:46
Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
Brief is an RSS feed extension. The proper version for Basilisk, and included in Classic Add-on Archives is 2.4.0. It has worked flawlessly since I migrated to Basilisk. What happens, with the new version of Basilisk, is that it removes the icon that appears at the top, with all the other active icons or, if you have it, the add-on bar at the bottom. Thus, you can not see your feeds, even though the feeds are still loading. I have tried various ways to preserve the icon, bring it down into "customize" feature, so I can then bring it back up after installing the new version. I've tried reinstalling Brief. Nothing seems to work. This is a vital extension for me so I hope this can be fixed. The icon is needed for user functionality of Brief. I am going to have to stay with the old version until this is resolved. Thanks.
-
- Moon Magic practitioner
- Posts: 2986
- Joined: 2015-09-26, 04:51
- Location: U.S.
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
Brief 2.4.0 is a hybrid xul/webextension, that could be why it broke, given this.
But the toolbar button shows up fine in Brief 2.3.0,
which is in CAA on Brief's versions page: caa:addon/brief/versions
But the toolbar button shows up fine in Brief 2.3.0,
which is in CAA on Brief's versions page: caa:addon/brief/versions
-
- Apollo supporter
- Posts: 44
- Joined: 2018-01-20, 23:46
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
I actually thought about this possibility after I posted. If you look at the Brief version history, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... /versions/ , 2.5.4 was released on Nov. 25, 2017 and, as stated, it is compatible with web extensions. So, I think that's part of the problem. At the same time, this version worked flawlessly with other version of Basilisk until the web extensions experiment was abandoned and, apparently, unwound somehow. I guess the question becomes: Can this be addressed in some fashion, or is this the way things are going to be, many/all hybrid extensions, not exclusively brief, are likely to not function, in some manner, now that the change has been made?
-
- Board Warrior
- Posts: 1322
- Joined: 2014-02-02, 22:15
- Location: Chicagoland
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
This is the way things are going to be, for the reasons in the link that coffeebreak posted.pintorama wrote:Can this be addressed in some fashion, or is this the way things are going to be, many/all hybrid extensions, not exclusively brief, are likely to not function, in some manner, now that the change has been made?
The only fashion in which to address this (in this specific case) would be for someone to fork Brief and apply whatever features/fixes were added between 2.4.0 and 2.3.0 without adding any of the WebExtension code.
Nichi nichi kore ko jitsu = Every day is a good day.
-
- Apollo supporter
- Posts: 44
- Joined: 2018-01-20, 23:46
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
I figured this would be the answer. I will wait to see if Moonchild pops in, to offer any sense of reassurance that this could be worked out at the Basilisk level, as this problem is affecting more than one extensions already. If nothing positive seems on the horizon, with genuine and great reluctance, because I feel this is a terrific project, with great people, I will have to leave Basilisk for Waterfox, which does not display this problem.
-
- Board Warrior
- Posts: 1322
- Joined: 2014-02-02, 22:15
- Location: Chicagoland
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
pintorama wrote:I will wait to see if Moonchild pops in, to offer any sense of reassurance that this could be worked out at the Basilisk level
Source: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=21298&start=20#p161691Moonchild wrote:[Removing WebExtension support] is not a decision that was made lightly, and won't be reconsidered.
Nichi nichi kore ko jitsu = Every day is a good day.
-
- Moon Magic practitioner
- Posts: 2986
- Joined: 2015-09-26, 04:51
- Location: U.S.
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
pintorama wrote:is this the way things are going to be, many/all hybrid extensions, not exclusively brief, are likely to not function, in some manner, now that the change has been made?
I don't know if every hybrid extension will have problems, but my gut guess is that it will depend on the extension.
Returning to the original issue...
Have you tried Brief 2.3.0, as recommended?coffeebreak wrote:But the toolbar button shows up fine in Brief 2.3.0,
which is in CAA on Brief's versions page: caa:addon/brief/versions
The release notes for v2.4.0 (see CAA, Brief's versions page) indicate that all changes from v2.3.0 to v2.4.0 were merely preparation for the transition to webextensions - i.e. no fixes or improvements to v2.4.0, therefore none lost by rolling back a version. Please consider trying it.
-
- Apollo supporter
- Posts: 44
- Joined: 2018-01-20, 23:46
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
I will give 2.3 a try tomorrow. I didn't understand what coffeebreak meant by caa:addon/brief/versions and then how to get there. I imagine it is likely to work I'll let you know.
-
- Moon Magic practitioner
- Posts: 2986
- Joined: 2015-09-26, 04:51
- Location: U.S.
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
It's an internal link in the Classic Add-ons Archive (CAA).pintorama wrote:I didn't understand what coffeebreak meant by caa:addon/brief/versions and then how to get there.
It can be accessed if the extension is installed (which I thought it was, since you referred to it in your original post and seemed familiar with its contents).
You might want to read here, the paragraph under the heading "Secondly, check the archives".
-
- Board Warrior
- Posts: 1322
- Joined: 2014-02-02, 22:15
- Location: Chicagoland
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
Nichi nichi kore ko jitsu = Every day is a good day.
-
- Apollo supporter
- Posts: 44
- Joined: 2018-01-20, 23:46
Re: Brief Extension Incompatible With New Version
Brief 2.30, does in fact work and brings back full functionality. Thanks to all. A overarching comment, made in the spirit of contribution, not criticism. I am completely confident the decision to abandon the WebExtensions experiment was not reached lightly. I'd expect nothing less from this development team. But when it comes to hybrid WebExtensions, like Brief, my central question is this: Is the lack of functionality of hybrid extensions something that was anticipated or something that has turned out to be an unintended consequence? If it is the former, then this was considered in the deliberation process. If it is the latter, perhaps revisiting the topic of hybrid extensions should be considered.