Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Improving Extension Installation in Thunderbird

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Scott MacGregor

unread,
Mar 27, 2007, 6:45:25 PM3/27/07
to
I've started a design document based on some discussion we had a little while ago on installing extensions in Thunderbird:

http://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Extension_Installation

Feel free to jump in and add to the wiki page. I've touched on the two main proposals we are considering right now.

I'm in favor of the mime type solution.

-Scott

Tony Mechelynck

unread,
Mar 27, 2007, 7:05:31 PM3/27/07
to

Looks to me like none of the proposals take into account the fact that many
extensions from many sources (including at least not only a.m.o. but also the
Extensions Mirror, Mozdev, and the various developers' home sites) can install
in two or more of Firefox, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey; sometimes even in
Netscape (6 and later) too. Currently, with some extensions, you can install a
single .xpi unchanged in all three and see it work (within the limits of each
app's capabilities) in all of them.

Best regards,
Tony.
--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
143. You dream in pallettes or 256 colors.

Ron K.

unread,
Mar 28, 2007, 12:29:57 AM3/28/07
to
On 3/27/2007 6:05 PM, Tbird Leader Tony Mechelynck radioed the tower to
announce:

Posted a comment to the Wiki that may deal with the multi-app applyable
extensions.

--
Ron K.
Don't be a fonted, it's just type casting

Henrik Skupin

unread,
Mar 28, 2007, 4:36:28 AM3/28/07
to
Scott MacGregor meinte am 3/28/07 12:45 AM:

> I've started a design document based on some discussion we had a
> little while ago on installing extensions in Thunderbird:
>

> Feel free to jump in and add to the wiki page. I've touched on the
> two main proposals we are considering right now.

Can't we use server located XML files which holds the basic info for all
the extensions? We could offer default locations e.g. AMO, mozdev or
already include the latest XML from AMO into the release version. The
user should be able to add new or remove existing locations. With a
button he could also update the files. For websites with a huge amount
of extensions it could be a lot of traffic, right. Especially when we
transfer detailed information or localised content. :/

What is different:

* Thunderbird/Sunbird/Songbird don't need an integrated browser. Even
Firefox could handle extensions this way.

* No special MIME-type. The info which application an extension supports
is given in the XML.

* We already have a list of all extension inside the add-ons manager and
don't have to do long-term searches on the web. I know that people from
AMO don't like that idea. :/

For example have a look at jEdit which is already doing that in such a way.


just my cents.

Henrik

Scott MacGregor

unread,
Apr 4, 2007, 7:08:48 PM4/4/07
to
Hi Henrik,

I'm not sure I quite followed your suggestion. Are you suggesting that the browser store .xpis in known locations for the various applications to pick up the next time they run?

Or are you suggesting we make the addons manager list extensions that are compatible with thunderbird direclty in the eaddons manager instead of using a web page to browse for them?

-Scott

magnus

unread,
Apr 6, 2007, 8:48:51 AM4/6/07
to
Scott MacGregor wrote:
> I've started a design document based on some discussion we had a little
> while ago on installing extensions in Thunderbird:
>
> http://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Extension_Installation
>
> Feel free to jump in and add to the wiki page. I've touched on the two
> main proposals we are considering right now.

Wouldn't the best be it .xpis for thunderbird would get Content-Disposition:
attachment? I think firefox may be ignoring it atm [1], but for ff3 it will
likely be fixed. That would help some, and in combination with some choosing app
[2] most issues would be solved.

Of course, amo could also offer to mail the extension to the user, but I'm not
so sure it's good to be teaching users to open executables from mail...

-Magnus


[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299372
[2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=313468

Henrik Skupin

unread,
Apr 10, 2007, 4:58:19 PM4/10/07
to
Scott MacGregor meinte am 4/5/07 1:08 AM:

Hi Scott,

> I'm not sure I quite followed your suggestion. Are you suggesting
> that the browser store .xpis in known locations for the various
> applications to pick up the next time they run?

No, that's not what I wanted to suggest. That wouldn't be a good
solution at all.

> Or are you suggesting we make the addons manager list extensions that
> are compatible with thunderbird direclty in the eaddons manager
> instead of using a web page to browse for them?

Yeah, that's the way which is quiet a good solution in various
applications. Each of our applications have an unique id and they could
ask a webservice on AMO for available add-ons which are compatible. For
this way we have following advantages:

* The list only contains certified add-ons. So an installation of
malicious add-ons could be prevented.

* You don't have to leave your application to find new add-ons. No
browser window is needed which could be used to break out.

* Due to the new l18n feature of AMO we could also offer only localized
builds and/or descriptions.

* Always the same UI and behavior for each application. The user will be
familar in installing add-ons.

But also drawbacks exists:

* How sites as mozdev.org or many others will be handled? Could they use
that webservice for their own sites and is it easy to adapt? Or do we
need another way how to install add-ons from this places. That shows
that it's not quiet good to have a distributed add-ons network.

* Perhaps a lot of data to transfer when updating the local add-ons list.

> http://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Extension_Installation

Shouldn't this be enhanced to each application and not only Thunderbird?
Also wouldn't it be better to move this thread to m.d.platform?

Henrik

0 new messages