[ABD - Legacy Edition Addons
Abdul Soumphonphakdy
This post was made since the original poster deleted the relivexbox360 modpack I've tried to replicate the PS4 legacy edition of the console editions and this is the closest I could get to the legacy edition this is for 1.14.4.
As no supported versions of Firefox will be compatible with legacy add-ons after this date, we will start the process of disabling legacy add-on versions on addons.mozilla.org (AMO) in September. On September 6, 2018, submissions for new legacy add-on versions will be disabled. All legacy add-on versions will be disabled in early October, 2018. Once this happens, users will no longer be able to find your extension on AMO.
For more information about porting legacy extensions to the WebExtensions API is available on MDN. We encourage legacy add-on developers to visit our wiki for more information about upcoming development work and ways to get in touch with our team for help.
The thing is
1. Photon is terrible in terms of both usability and looks
2. I meant systemwide consistency across all browsers (since WE is pretty much Chromium Extensions API and there is polyfill allowing WE to run in Chromium)
Could you at least archive the last version of legacy add-ons the way you archive older versions of Firefox so that people have a safe, official repository for these add-ons should we need them for an older machine we are trying to get running on a network? You do realize Firefox is the last and most recent web browser to support both Windows XP and Vista.
Can you at least delay disabling legacy addons?
=> Session Management API was planned to ready in Q3 2018, now this date is moved to 2019; they are few other important APIs like Toolbar API. Can you wait with old addon disabling at least until these addons will be ready (plus time needed to correct errors/bugs in new API + few months for webextension developers to introduce new API to their WEs),
=> Windows XP machines will be not forever. Few additional years will be more than enough for most users.
I understand that the cost of legacy addon repository is an important factor. But maybe lower a cost by converting it into a static/frozen database of these addons and just disable submissions of new addons, and any other changes. Or convert legacy addon repository into ftp database. Possibilities are endless here.
These .xpi files will take approx. 100 GB. It is not that much. Why they cannot be available for example on ftp server? You could also make this database read only, without new submissions, and without anybody from Mozilla needed to do anything with that other than keeping backup copies.
I agree 100%.
Or create ftp database, in similar way like all firefox versions are available now.
This database does not to be updated, it can be static/frozen. New legacy addon versions can be stopped.
Hi Artem, thanks for your comment. From a previous comment, it sounds like some groups have backed up legacy extensions. Unfortunately, we have limited resources and do not have the capacity to create and maintain an archive.
Lots of people have been holding at 52.x or 56.x until important addons have been upgraded. The addon authors have been waiting until BLOCKING BUGS IN FIREFOX like Bug#1291841 (APIs required to implement cookie-management addons are not implemented) are fixed.
It seems that Firefox team decided to completely discard their power users who like incredible Tab Mix Plus features. My only concern is your management lie: first you announced XUL addons deprecation and provided one year for developers to adopt their addons. TMP was extremely popular, but no API work for it was done. Then your team finally made APIs list required for this addon to function and said that resources are limited, that is not our priority etc. There is a problem with management: no planning, thinking about your users. You started break thing much more faster than before. And you are losing your most loyal users and developers. Sad.
If users opt not to update to Quantum, will they still be able to use previously downloaded legacy add-ons with a previously downloaded version of ESR 52 or will everything just stop working at some point?
Just a rhetoric question: And whose fault is that? That users will be running unsupported browsers open to security vulnerabilities. First Mozilla introduced HUGE REGRESSIONS in FF57, and then has been doing too little to provide APIs for webextensions in timely manner. You should provide sufficient APIs for 50 the most popular addons BEFORE removing support for XUL addons.
And now it is really easy for you to blame users that they do not want to use still faulty Firefox Quantum. Firefox 56 was the best Mozilla browser. It was much faster then previous versions, and yet it supported XUL addons. Why you did not create FF56 ESR, I do not know.
sorry, bandwith from a 100GB-archive where each .xpi may have something like 1-2 MB file-size?!? that cant be more than a drop, compared to the daily downloads of the browser itself, which has something like 50-100MB each.
Any ETA about when statistics will be fully migrated from AMO to addons.thunderbird.net?
Currently addon stats on addons.thunderbird.net are frozen/broken and only show what was cloned on (AMOATN) splitting date. Visiting add-on stats of Thunderbird add-ons only shows endless loading screens.
This deadline, like the whole move to a half baked webextension system is totally irresponsible, leave millions of long time users of firefox with poor choices of either giving up on security of usability.
As a more than 20 years developers, seeing in bugzilla basic functionality bug reports for the webextension that are dragging more than a year proves that this project was totally mismanaged, either in terms of resources, or understanding of the required scope. Either way, while still understanding the incredible resource strain that mozilla suffers, this is still mind boggling.
1) per earlier comments once add-on is disabled the .xpi files are no longer available from AMO. Could it be still available through other distribution channels?
2) what if the user is on unsupported version with the add-on installed and then updates to the latest after October 2018. Would add-on removed from the browser? How could it be updated to web-extension then?
Thanks
Fact is you sell out to Google with bringing more and more Google related technology inside the browser. If you really think with offering more of the same what Chrome does offer to lure us Chrome users on board.. I am afraid you are wrong.
While it is true, that most of Chrome users are loving simplicity and minimalism, most Chrome users stay away from a developer who sells their own user-base to lure over now a totally different one with different opinion, demands/needs.
I am very happy with the legacy version. I tried the new version many months ago and did not like it at all, and have stuck with the legacy version since. My needs are basic and I don't need fancy features or a constantly changing software. I don't share in Evernote and just need reliable, unchanging note software.
In my experience, the more that apps are 'improved', the more unpredictable they get and the harder they are to use. The Android app I use only occasionally, but it seems that nothing is ever where I expect it to be. At one time it was simple and just worked. I worry the current Windows version is similarly problematic.
Legacy suits me just fine, but this message alarmed me. Has legacy reached its sunset? If want to try the current version again, can I do that alongside without losing the ability to revert to Legacy? Does the web version resemble the Windows version and provide a simulation? I have not explored it.
Hi. Yes, you can try out the new version alongside the old one - you might want to just sign on to the web version via Evernote.com which will give you a pretty good idea where things are at. If you install the new version on a desktop it defaults to uninstalling the old app. Don't Panic! You will not lose your old database and you can reinstall the older version if you wish.
But. Yes the old version is no longer supported and will not be developed in any way - some Mac users have already found that changes in their OS have restricted its use, and that will happen more and more as time goes on.
People who really hate the new app have switched to Notion and OneNote - but it's notable that some have quietly switched back; no-one seems to have found something which is hands-down better than Evernote. YMMV!
I was a denier for a year, I think, since the new app came out - but I now use it 99.9% of the time. There are work-arounds for most of the differences, and you can always come back here and get some help if you need it. Good luck, whatever you do...
Initially, I wasn't fond of Ver 10 as it required me to adapt to different locations of features, which was outside my comfort zone. As a precaution, I installed the Legacy version alongside. However, after using the newer version for about two months, I became more accustomed to it and eventually discarded Legacy as it was no longer necessary. I now appreciate the new features and have significantly increased my usage of EN.
795a8134c1