![]() I’ve updated extensions several times already – hundred of hours gone – always because someone with OCD is on a power trip at Mozilla and they want all the APIs to look the same. This solution is insufficient, and it’s the kick I needed to move to Vivaldi. This is a lot of work but it isn’t impossible and several official versions of Firefox have done it – usually developer versions in the transition periods. What this news tells us is that Waterfox development isn’t dedicated enough to maintain a forked version of Firefox that includes new features from Mozilla and preserves the old ones. The code to run old extensions already exists within old Firefox. Not quite sure I understand the vitriol for myself or Waterfox in there, at the end of the day I’m trying to make the web a better place (apologies for the cliché) and I’d like to do it the way I envision (with the guidance of what users have been asking for). That was all, and it was meant as a way to attract developers to developing for the platform.Īlso a paywall in the way mentioned in that thread makes no logical sense – users would just find another source for add-ons to install them. similar to purchasing an app on the App Store. ![]() What I mentioned was giving the developers the options to monetise their own add-ons if they wished to do so as a way to earn money. > Should I remind that he even tried to paywall extensions that would run on Waterfox exclusively, but were existing legacy extensions? There seems to be a lot of manipulations of things I have said in that thread I am only going to reply to an especially egregious statement as it is rather defaming: ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |