Basilisk & Waterfox?

My Firefox extensions that have been released for Pale Moon

Basilisk & Waterfox?

Postby Sun42 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 12:21 pm

Sorry for appearing (or being) really dense, but to clarify:

Your ongoing development for your legacy extensions will only cover the old-school ff27-based Pale Moon, not the recent maintined forks Basilisk (ff55-ish) & Waterfox (ff56)? It would be a pity, b/c I see quite a lot of people using either of these two.

And yes, I do understad that Basilisk is by no means the succesor to Pale Moon :-). Even though it has a much more modern code base and more recent legacy extensions are supported: With Pale Moon, you have to choose wisely which legacy extension versions from amo work or which forks from pm are supported - and only Basilisk/Waterfox support sdk and we addons.
Sun42
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 11:33 am

Re: Basilisk & Waterfox?

Postby cbaker_admin » Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:09 pm

As far as I know, all of my extensions hosted on AMO should (in theory) work with Basilisk and Waterfox as is.

So, for the time being, I should only need two sets of versions: one for Pale Moon and one for all other XUL supported browsers. Eventually, I would hope to have just one-size-fits-all version that works in all current XUL browsers.
Chuck
cbaker_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4569
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 10:51 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ USA

Re: Basilisk & Waterfox?

Postby gracious1 » Sun Dec 03, 2017 10:28 pm

Sun42 wrote:Your ongoing development for your legacy extensions will only cover the old-school ff27-based Pale Moon… what a pity …

It forked from Fx 27, but it has continued development. Where it started from does not make it obsolete. That is what forking means. Pale Moon is "recent maintained" as well; it just had a release on 28 November.

Sun42 wrote:nd only Basilisk/Waterfox support sdk and we addons.

Chuck Baker makes only XUL/XPCOM addons. So how is that statement relevant?
It isn't, and you know it isn't. It's a rhetorical strategy.

With Pale Moon you have to pick and choose you have to choose wisely which legacy extension versions from amo work

This statement, which is intended to be inflammatory, is completely irrelevant to this forum:
  • That statement is completely irrelevant to Chuck's support of Pale Moon, as he publishes PM extensions to the Pale Moon Add-ons Site, not to AMO.
  • It is also irrelevant to Basilisk and Waterfox, the supposed topic of this thread. Whatever issues there may be at AMO with respect to Pale Moon, it has nothing to do with Basilisk or Waterfox or Chrome or Opera or any other browser.
  • It is also irrelevant to this particular forum, Firefox Extensions > Pale Moon, which is about extensions developed specifically for Pale Moon for release at the Pale Moon repository

You are not trying to be helpful; you are trying to suggest that the developer has made a mistake in supporting Pale Moon. You are trying to influence people to quit using and/or supporting Pale Moon. You come on the Pale Moon forums and do the same thing. That is trolling.

Developers get to decide which browsers they support. If you don't like a browser, don't use it.
Last edited by gracious1 on Mon Dec 04, 2017 12:10 am, edited 8 times in total.
gracious1
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:32 am

Re: Basilisk & Waterfox?

Postby gracious1 » Sun Dec 03, 2017 10:35 pm

cbaker_admin wrote:As far as I know, all of my extensions hosted on AMO should (in theory) work with Basilisk and Waterfox as is.

All of the XUL/XPCOM extensions you have published to AMO should work with either Basilisk or Waterfox.

I would like to ask the moderator to please move this thread out of the Firefox Extensions > Pale Moon forum and into another one. Thank you.
gracious1
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:32 am

Re: Basilisk & Waterfox?

Postby gracious1 » Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:20 pm

cbaker_admin wrote:Eventually, I would hope to have just one-size-fits-all version that works in all current XUL browsers.


That may be possible once the Unified XUL Platform (UXP) is perfected.
  • Various points about UXP (and Goanna)
  • other potential apps on UXP
  • From Wikipedia:
    In 2017, Straver began the Unified XUL Platform (UXP) project.[28] UXP is a newer fork of the Mozilla codebase than Pale Moon 27 and is intended to be a platform for any number of XUL-based applications, including a future version of Pale Moon.[29] To demonstrate and refine UXP, Straver uses it to create a new browser, Basilisk, which he first released in November 2017.[30]
gracious1
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:32 am

Re: Basilisk & Waterfox?

Postby cbaker_admin » Mon Dec 04, 2017 12:42 pm

gracious1 wrote:Chuck Baker makes only XUL/XPCOM addons.

That is not entirely true. I have ported two of my extensions (Back to Top and Paste Email Plus) to Chrome using WebExtensions. I have also written two other Chrome specific add-ons (Pagemark and TIRE).
Chuck
cbaker_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4569
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 10:51 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ USA

Re: Basilisk & Waterfox?

Postby Sun42 » Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:20 pm

gracious1 wrote:You are not trying to be helpful; you are trying to suggest that the developer has made a mistake in supporting Pale Moon. You are trying to influence people to quit using and/or supporting Pale Moon. You come on the Pale Moon forums and do the same thing. That is trolling.


I kindly disagree, you are trolling by co-moderating a foreign forum - but I won't insult the dev my discussing with you off-topic here. Sorry to Chuck Baker for having the above discussion in your forum.

cbaker_admin wrote:
gracious1 wrote:Chuck Baker makes only XUL/XPCOM addons.

That is not entirely true. I have ported two of my extensions (Back to Top and Paste Email Plus) to Chrome using WebExtensions. I have also written two other Chrome specific add-ons (Pagemark and TIRE).


I do hope the remaining xul browsers (Pale Moon, Basilisk, Waterfox) are coverd by as many "one size fits all" extensions to prevent fragmentation. And I see different people using each of these as they have different feature sets and strengths/weaknesses. As Pale Moon will switch to the "UXP" base of Basilisk sooner or later, including all in one xpi will probably be easier, too.
Sun42
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 11:33 am


Return to Pale Moon

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron