-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 128
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Chrome/ium support #59
Comments
Only that I likely won't adjust design and stuff for it, i.e. do not actively adjust stuff for it and rather only do minimal tests in Chromium. As for JS code I would argue to only use polyfills. I.e. E.g. And we would maybe need some adjustments so we generate a different ZIP for Chrome/ium, so we don't have to ship that additional (polyfill) JS in the Firefox version. |
As for the |
I did some further research and I think we have to drop this idea. In Chrome it is not possible at all to open a popup programmatically which is a huge problem for this add-on as there are quite some actions which depend on this. |
Well… we could just leave out support for this. Then we just have no context menus and so on – kinda like version 1.1. right now. |
BTW https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill may help, but it's likely still a little more to do… (Edit: Noticed this has already been linked above.) |
Are there some plans to extend this add-on as a Chrome extension?
This article lists all incompatibilities between Firefox and Chrome extensions: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/WebExtensions/Chrome_incompatibilities
But I already did some testing with this polyfill: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill and it works without problems (except that you need to modify the manifest.json a little bit because not all properties are supported by Chrome...)
Or is there a reason why this add-on should not become a Chrome extension?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: