I used that guide to set up web-ext and used it to temporary-install one of my add-ons into nightly. Quite a lot of it works, but some features must be enabled in its options. I couldn’t see how to access the add-on’s options page, either from within Fenix or from remote-debugging. How do I do that?
Hey @DaveRo, try running the following in the browser console:
This is so ridiculous. This is not a solution to the problem. This is not even a workaround.
This is an insult to all Firefox users that have ever installed an add-on and above all an insult to all add-on developers, as all developers have started small and know that no add-on could ever reach a “recommended” status out of the box. We need all add-ons back in the “production” versions of the browser. Fast.
I have switched to F-Droid Fennec for now, well knowing that this is not going to be a solution for long, but I was hoping to give Mozilla a long chance to win me back. Seeing the way things are going, I am doubting Mozilla will get it’s act together.
3 posts were merged into an existing topic: Iceraven mobile browser
Could you please show a bit more respect to people who are working to make the browser better?
They may be doing things that do not match your expectations, but that’s not a reason to insult them. They may have more information about that than we do, or they may have different priorities, and that’s not a reason to be disrespectful. I also hope that the Fenix team will at some point change their stance and allow any addons on stable version, but that’s likely blocked on implementing at least some of the key APIs they haven’t got yet — or, possibly, on making sure a bad quality addon cannot degrade the system performance radically. Anyway, I tend to trust the statement that for now this limitation is needed.
Criticism is not disrespect. To want to end disharmony by calling it disrespect is neither right nor helpful.
I myself worked on the (now rightly scrapped) rendering engine back in 2001-2003, mainly constructing and providing test-cases, but also contributing a few lines of code here and there, so I am emotionally invested in Mozilla. Decisons made increasingly less by the community and more by “The Foundation” are threatening the future of an open internet. Assuming a position in which one can make decisons (project leaders, developers, etc.) also means having to assume responsibilitiy for those decisions and thus having to listen to the criticism that results and reply accordingly. This is what is happening here, nothing else.
I would welcome two responses by the foundation: 1. We are working to bring back support of any and all add-ons to the the Firefox releases, our goal is e.g. the Beginning of Q1/2021. 2. We messed up, we realised that now, please bear with us while we fix this.
I don’t need an apology for my ego, but it would underscore the pledge to bring back what made FF what it was, an integral piece of the open web.
Criticism is not, but calling others’ actions “ridiculous” and “insult” feels like disrespect to me. Sorry if that does not match your perspective. Also, I apologize for using the same words in my previous reply to you.
AFAIK, your “The Foundation” here should refer to the Mozilla Corporation, not to the Mozilla Foundation, correct?
Let’s be realistic: the best case we could expect would be “all WebExtensions signed with AMO”, and most likely also “…marked as Fenix-compatible”.
I’ve been testing my own addons with nightly to see what works and what doesn’t.
Works fine. It’s about a dozen lines of code and had 100+ users.
I’ve never understood why anyone would want to open tabs in background by default. But ideally this would be an option in settings; in desktop Fx there is a pref - browser.tabs.loadInBackground.
These two addons:
don’t work -I assume there’s no context menu API (yet?). They had 50-100 users IIRC.
Those would be better done with gestures.
My personal most important addon, the one I mentioned in the other thread, will probably work. But testing has revealed some layout differences. Curiously, I see the same differences when I run it in Chromium Edge! I wonder why?
I just want to make it clear, Iceraven is a volunteer project and not official. Use official methods with Fenix before you report anything. Also, the Fenix code changes all the time. They might be behind the Fenix developers.
Does anyone know how to move this discussion about IceRaven to another topic? Seems improper for this topic.
I can help move Iceraven to a separate topic.
I assume there’s no context menu API (yet?).
Correct; context menus are currently not supported.
But testing has revealed some layout differences.
That sounds about right. We worked pretty closely with the developers of the extensions currently enabled on release to integrate their extension’s UX with that of Fenix. I’m currently working on making those recommendations more broadly available on Firefox Extension Workshop, but it’s going to take some time to build that documentation.
Curiously, I see the same differences when I run it in Chromium Edge! I wonder why?
That’s coincidental but interesting.
Thanks. I can’t think of a good title for the thread. Maybe something like “Further Add-On Support in IceRaven, a Fenix Fork”. I would need to edit the first post before actually creating it. Been a while since I’ve created a topic in a forum.
Hi all. I wanted to share these two recent updates about add-on support on Firefox for Android:
10 more Recommended Extensions have been enabled on Firefox for Android. Google Search Fixer and Video Background Play Fix are currently available on the Beta channel be available on release during the next update on October 20. The other eight extensions are currently available on Nightly and, as long as no major issues are found, are scheduled to move into the release channel with the November 17 update.
Firefox for Android Nightly now includes an override that allows you to install extensions listed on AMO via AMO’s Collections feature. Instructions for configuring the override can be found in this blog post. The post also links to information about which WebExtensions APIs are currently supported on Android.
@caitmuenster Thanks for that, and to the devs. I have installed my Mudcat addon in Nightly.
I wanted to install this but I can’t add it to my collection: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/android/addon/android_new_tabs_in_foreground ‘Find an addon to include in this collection’ doesn’t find it. Paradoxically I suspect that’s because it’s in AMO as an Android addon - not available for the desktop platform. I suspect that’s unintentional.
Based on earlier descriptions of how the search works you’d have to either fake your user agent to look like Firefox for Android or add it to the collection with Firefox for Android.
I should have thought of that. It works. Thanks.
And Stylus appears to work with Fenix too, including importing Fennec’s userstyles
I disrespect answers that are not completely honest. And I disrespect an organization if it decides to give that kind of answers.
The kind of dishonest answers I mean are the kind that Caitlin Neiman has been giving. She has not lied, she has obviously taken great care not to lie or to give false information, but at the same time she has made it perfectly clear that the full truth is not available. There are obviously no military secrets involved here, no good reason to hide anything.
I don’t blame Caitlin Neiman - this is her job. I don’t think she made a personal decision to give evasive answers to reasonable questions, I think she has been assigned this task because she’s good at it, and is doing the job to the best of her ability (and far better than I could do).
It’s just sad to me that “Mozilla disinformation officer” has become a thing.
@davidpiano, you are welcome to voice your disagreement or disapproval with the new Firefox for Android product, but personal attacks aren’t welcome here.
Please make sure you read Mozilla’s Community Participation Guidelines before commenting again and consider this your final warning.
We understand your frustration with the current state of add-on support in Fenix. We communicated where we are in this process but haven’t said specifically where we are going. That’s because it hasn’t been fully decided and we prefer to post information we are sure about. We will provide updates as soon as decisions are made.
That said, this thread has veered into speculation, bad-faith assumptions, and call-outs, and that will not be tolerated. We will start moderating messages and will close this thread if this behavior continues.