Mozilla has invited add-on developers to get involved from the beginning, two years ago. That's exactly what NoScript's developer did, two years ago. There's been plenty of time for add-on authors to get involved with developing and extending the APIs their particular add-ons need.
if WebExtensions-over-a-year-ago were all that were available.
WebExtensions-over-a-year-ago weren't all that was available. The point is that there has been plenty of time for add-ons to properly plan and execute the transition. Software projects are either well managed or they aren't. This particular add-on seems to have been poorly managed.
First, a browser should randomly "click" on the ads and then just spew the resulting web page to/dev/null. This would start creating false clicks. False clicks would cause the advertisers to start paying more only to discover that the effectiveness of Google advertising is becoming less and less useful.
no search function for the PDF viewer, can't adjust the line width for Reader View
Firefox's PDF viewer does have a search function and you can adjust the line width in Firefox's Reader View. Maybe you're thinking of some other browser.
scrapped an extensions architecture that worked fine
It didn't work fine. Firefox 57 is faster without it. Have you tried Firefox nightly? Alternatively, wait for 57 to move to the beta channel and try it then.
Wouldn't be simpler to make your own browser? You can show everyone how it should be done and, because your browser is so good, you'll quickly gain the majority of browser market share. You'll rake in hundreds of millions of dollars in search engine deals. All other browser makers will fear you. Also, chicks will dig you.
Two versions of Firefox from now, they will jettison what made their browser great: the extensions.
Prove it. The extensions API is changing, that's all. I'm using the WebExtensions version of uBlock Origin (version 1.14.4) in Firefox 56 beta and it works fine. Tree Style Tab is another add-on people like and the WebExtensions version is in development.
Add-ons will either migrate to the new API or they won't. If WebExtensions APIs to support your pet add-on are missing, then get involved and add them. Mozilla wants you to.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see how time helps
Mozilla has invited add-on developers to get involved from the beginning, two years ago. That's exactly what NoScript's developer did, two years ago. There's been plenty of time for add-on authors to get involved with developing and extending the APIs their particular add-ons need.
ZFS enhancements come to mind.
After the split with OpenSolaris, ZFS development moved to the Illumos project and OpenZFS grew out of it.
if WebExtensions-over-a-year-ago were all that were available.
WebExtensions-over-a-year-ago weren't all that was available. The point is that there has been plenty of time for add-ons to properly plan and execute the transition. Software projects are either well managed or they aren't. This particular add-on seems to have been poorly managed.
Can the codebase be recovered?
Doesn't need to be. Illumos is the open fork of (not so) OpenSolaris.
First, a browser should randomly "click" on the ads and then just spew the resulting web page to /dev/null. This would start creating false clicks. False clicks would cause the advertisers to start paying more only to discover that the effectiveness of Google advertising is becoming less and less useful.
AdNauseam does this. Some think AdNauseam works a little too well. It was recently blocked by Pale Moon.
It will play fewer videos formats out of the box.
Such as?
We just rewrote our extension in Jetpack months ago.
Jetpack 1.0 was released over 6 years ago. I don't have much sympathy for people who only rewrote to Jetpack a few months ago.
If you require us to now rewrite our Jetpack extension in WebExtensions, we quit.
Firefox's move to WebExtensions was announced over two years ago and you could start using WebExtensions over a year ago. The rate of change has hardly been rapid.
I'm probably going to move to Vivaldi or something, I guess.
Sure. That sounds rational.
I'm willing to put $100 on Mozilla going bankrupt
But only willing to post anonymously. Seems a bit, well, cowardly.
no search function for the PDF viewer, can't adjust the line width for Reader View
Firefox's PDF viewer does have a search function and you can adjust the line width in Firefox's Reader View. Maybe you're thinking of some other browser.
Lots of authors are just quitting.
So? It's a good opportunity for new authors. Find some extension you like and offer to take over as the maintainer. It'll look good on your resume.
On top of that, the new APIs will have only been out for a few months when the pull support for all "legacy" extensions.
WebExtensions have been available for over a year. Everyone's had plenty of time to port extensions and request changes.
remembered as the final blow to Firefox
Doubt it. It's a new beginning.
He specifically mentioned a reason: Pentadactyl.
They've known for two years that the new API was coming. Have they built a WebExtensions version or not? Tridactyl is at least giving it a go.
I find your paranoia hilarious. Try Firefox 57. What's the matter? Afraid you'll like it?
FireBug was useful enough to be picked apart and integrated directly into the browser [...] though in a feature-reduced form
What's an example of something FireBug could do that Firefox DevTools can't?
scrapped an extensions architecture that worked fine
It didn't work fine. Firefox 57 is faster without it. Have you tried Firefox nightly? Alternatively, wait for 57 to move to the beta channel and try it then.
Why are you asking an AC instead of the developer of Google Earth?
Because he was the one who brought it up. Makes sense if think about it.
Are you some kind of Mozilla shill or defender that can't deal with negativity?
No. Don't be so paranoid.
Why so emotional? I think you've lost perspective. Maybe try some meditation or something.
we need to stage a coup against Mozilla
Seems like a lot of effort.
Wouldn't be simpler to make your own browser? You can show everyone how it should be done and, because your browser is so good, you'll quickly gain the majority of browser market share. You'll rake in hundreds of millions of dollars in search engine deals. All other browser makers will fear you. Also, chicks will dig you.
So why not do that?
Why? What does it require that Firefox doesn't have?
continue button to begin your transaction would do nothing in Firefox, but would work in Chrome
And you proved that was a consequence of the browser itself and not some add-on like an ad-blocker?
There is at least one other site that I have trouble with when I use it, but I can't remember which.
I don't find these "examples" very compelling. Do you have any better ones with links?
they are effectively killing it.
How? Extensions still exist and Firefox 57 really is a whole lot faster. You should try out the nightly version now, or wait for 57 to move to beta.
Now I keep a copy of Chrome around for sites that are broken in Firefox.
What's an example of a site that works in Chrome but is broken in Firefox?
Two versions of Firefox from now, they will jettison what made their browser great: the extensions.
Prove it. The extensions API is changing, that's all. I'm using the WebExtensions version of uBlock Origin (version 1.14.4) in Firefox 56 beta and it works fine. Tree Style Tab is another add-on people like and the WebExtensions version is in development.
Add-ons will either migrate to the new API or they won't. If WebExtensions APIs to support your pet add-on are missing, then get involved and add them. Mozilla wants you to.
What we're seeing for the first time is a clash between the concept of the nation state and these global, borderless corporations.
No, this is not the first time. The East India Company, for example, had immense power at its height.
I'm betting on Arthur Curry.