• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    84 months ago

    Didn’t they remove XUL extensions to make their extension interface compatible with inferior chrome web extensions?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      154 months ago

      I just did a quick online search and it seems like the reason for removing that was that it was way too much work to maintain and stopped them from implementing performance improvements for Firefox. Apparently it was also a lot of work for extension developers, since they had to update their extensions constantly.

      That’s just what I read tho, I wasn’t there when XUL extensions where still a thing.

    • Pup Biru
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 months ago

      i wouldn’t say inferior… mozilla extensions were more performant and flexible, web extensions (ie the initial chrome format - now a standard that most browsers use) are easier to develop, and thus there were a lot more of them