<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>firefox on Oxymoronical</title>
    <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/tag/firefox/</link>
    <description>Recent content in firefox on Oxymoronical</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:49:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/tag/firefox/feed/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Welcoming a new Firefox/Toolkit peer</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2019/02/Welcoming-a-new-FirefoxToolkit-peer/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2019/02/Welcoming-a-new-FirefoxToolkit-peer/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Please join me in welcoming Bianca Danforth to the set of peers blessed with reviewing patches to Firefox and Toolkit. She’s been doing great work making testing experiment extensions easy and so it’s time for her to level-up.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Taming Phabricator</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2018/06/Taming-Phabricator/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2018 10:31:08 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2018/06/Taming-Phabricator/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;So Mozilla is going all-in on Phabricator and Differential as a code review tool. I have mixed feelings on this, not least because it’s support for patch series is more manual than I’d like. But since this is the choice Mozilla has made I might as well start to get used to it. One of the first things you see when you log into Phabricator is a default view full of information.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Searchfox in VS Code</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2018/06/Searchfox-in-VS-Code/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2018 12:21:13 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2018/06/Searchfox-in-VS-Code/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I spend most of my time developing flipping back and forth between &lt;a href=&#34;https://code.visualstudio.com/&#34;&gt;VS Code&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&#34;https://searchfox.org/&#34;&gt;Searchfox&lt;/a&gt;. VS Code is a great editor but it has nowhere near the speed needed to do searches over the entire tree, at least on my machine. Searchfox on the other hand is pretty fast. But there’s something missing. I usually want to search Searchfox for something I found in the code. Then I want to get the file I found in Searchfox open in my editor.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>On Firefox module ownership</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2016/12/On-Firefox-module-ownership/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2016 16:15:24 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2016/12/On-Firefox-module-ownership/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;It has been over eleven years since I first wrote a patch for Firefox. It was reviewed by the then-Firefox module owner, Mike Connor. If you had told me then that at some point in the future &lt;em&gt;I&lt;/em&gt; was going to be the module owner I probably would have laughed at you. I didn’t know at the time how much Mozilla would shape my life. Yet yesterday Dave Camp handed over the reigns to me and here we are.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A new owner for the add-ons manager</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2016/08/A-new-owner-for-the-add-ons-manager/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:29:33 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2016/08/A-new-owner-for-the-add-ons-manager/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I’ve been acting as the owner for the add-ons manager for the past little while and while I have always cared a lot about the add-ons space it is time to formerly pass over the torch. So I was pleased that &lt;a href=&#34;http://rhelmer.org/blog/&#34;&gt;Rob Helmer&lt;/a&gt; was willing to take it over from me.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Rob has been doing some exceptional work on making system add-ons (used as part of the go faster project) more robust and easier for Mozilla to use. He’s also been thinking lot about improvements we can make to the add-ons manager code to make it more friendly to approach.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving the performance of the add-ons manager with asynchronous file I/O</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2016/01/Improving-the-performance-of-the-add-ons-manager-with-asynchronous-file-IO/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:35:25 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2016/01/Improving-the-performance-of-the-add-ons-manager-with-asynchronous-file-IO/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;The add-ons manager has a dirty secret. It uses an awful lot of synchronous file I/O. This is the kind of I/O that blocks the main thread and can cause Firefox to be janky. I’m told that that is a technical term. Asynchronous file I/O is much nicer, it means you can let the rest of the app continue to function while you wait for the I/O operation to complete. I rewrote much of the current code from scratch for Firefox 4.0 and even back then we were trying to switch to asynchronous file I/O wherever possible. But still I used mostly synchronous file I/O.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Linting for Mozilla JavaScript code</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2015/12/Linting-for-Mozilla-JavaScript-code/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:27:07 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2015/12/Linting-for-Mozilla-JavaScript-code/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;One of the projects I’ve been really excited about recently is getting ESLint working for a lot of our JavaScript code. If you haven’t come across ESLint or linters in general before they are automated tools that scan your code and warn you about syntax errors. They can usually also be set up with a set of rules to enforce code styles and warn about potential bad practices. The devtools and Hello folks have been using eslint for a while already and Gijs asked why we weren’t doing this more generally. This struck a chord with me and a few others and so we’ve been spending some time over the past few weeks getting our in-tree support for ESLint to work more generally and fixing issues with browser and toolkit JavaScript code in particular to make them lintable.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Delivering Firefox features faster</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2015/10/Delivering-Firefox-features-faster/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2015 11:20:28 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2015/10/Delivering-Firefox-features-faster/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Over time Mozilla has been trying to reduce the amount of time between developing a feature and getting it into a user’s hands. Some time ago we would do around one feature release of Firefox every year, more recently we’ve moved to doing one feature release every six weeks. But it still takes at least 12 weeks for a feature to get to users. In some cases we can speed that up by landing new things directly on the beta/aurora branches but the more we do this the harder it is for release managers to track the risk of shipping a given release.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Making communicating with chrome from in-content pages easy</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2015/03/Making-communicating-with-chrome-from-in-content-pages-easy/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2015 08:34:24 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2015/03/Making-communicating-with-chrome-from-in-content-pages-easy/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;As Firefox increasingly switches to support running in multiple processes we’ve been finding common problems. Where we can we are designing nice APIs to make solving them easy. One problem is that we often want to run in-content pages like about:newtab and about:home in the child process without privileges making it safer and less likely to bring down Firefox in the event of a crash. These pages still need to get information from and pass information to the main process though, so we have had to come up with ways to handle that. Often we use custom code in a frame script acting as a middle-man, using things like DOM events to listen for requests from the in-content page and then messaging to the main process.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Developer Tools meet-up in Portland</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2014/03/Developer-Tools-meet-up-in-Portland/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2014 14:33:06 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2014/03/Developer-Tools-meet-up-in-Portland/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Two weeks ago the developer tools teams and a few others met in the Portland office for a very successful week of discussions and hacking. The first day was about setting the stage for the week and working out what everyone was going to work on. Dave Camp kicked us off with a review of the last six months in developer tools and talked about what is going to be important for us to focus on in 2014. We then had a little more in-depth information from each of the teams. After lunch a set of lightning talks went over some projects and ideas that people had been working on recently.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>An editable box model view in the devtools</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2014/02/An-editable-box-model-view-in-the-devtools/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2014/02/An-editable-box-model-view-in-the-devtools/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;This week the whole devtools group has been sequestered in Mozilla’s Portland office having one of our regular meet-ups. As always it’s been a fantastically productive week with lots of demos to show for it. I’ll be writing a longer write-up later but I wanted to post about what I played with over the week.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;My wife does the odd bit of web development on the side. For a long time she was a loyal Firebug user and a while ago I asked her what she thought of Firefox’s built in devtools. She quickly pointed out a couple of features that Firebug had that Firefox did not. As I was leaving for this week I mentioned I’d be with the devtools group and she asked whether her features had been fixed yet. It turns out that &lt;a href=&#34;https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=918716&#34;&gt;colour swatches&lt;/a&gt; had been but the box model &lt;a href=&#34;https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=850336&#34;&gt;still wasn’t editable&lt;/a&gt;. So I figured I could earn myself some brownie points by hacking on that this week.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Six years revisited</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/05/Six-years-revisited/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 09:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/05/Six-years-revisited/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Two years ago &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/04/6-years-ago&#34;&gt;I blogged&lt;/a&gt; about how it had been six years since I wrote my first patch for Firefox. Today I get to say that it’s been six years since I started getting paid to do what I love, working for Mozilla. In that time I’ve moved to a new continent, found a wife (through Mozilla no less!), progressed from coder to module owner to manager, seen good friends leave for other opportunities and others join and watched (dare I say helped?) Mozilla, and the Firefox team in particular, grow from the small group that I joined in 2007 to the large company that will soon surpass 1000 employees.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Firefox now ships with the add-on SDK</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/05/Firefox-now-ships-with-the-add-on-SDK/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 15:31:59 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/05/Firefox-now-ships-with-the-add-on-SDK/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;It’s been a long ride but we can finally say it. This week Firefox 21 shipped and it includes the add-on SDK modules.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;shipped.jpg&#34;&gt;&lt;img src=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/05/Firefox-now-ships-with-the-add-on-SDK/shipped.jpg&#34; style=&#34;width: 343px&#34; alt=&#34;We took all the Jetpack APIs and we shipped them in Firefox!&#34; title=&#34;We took all the Jetpack APIs and we shipped them in Firefox!&#34;&gt;&#xA;  &lt;/a&gt;What does this mean? Well for users it means two important things:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Smaller add-ons. Since they no longer need to ship the APIs themselves add-ons only have to include the unique code that makes them special. That’s something like a 65% file-size saving for the most popular SDK based add-ons, probably more for simpler add-ons.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Add-ons will stay compatible with Firefox for longer. We can evolve the modules in Firefox that add-ons use so that most of the time when changes happen to Firefox the modules seamlessly shift to keep working. There are still some cases where that might be impossible (when a core feature is dropped from Firefox for example) but hopefully those should be rare.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ol&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;To take advantage of these benefits add-ons have to be repacked with a recent version of the SDK. We’re &lt;a href=&#34;https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla-labs-jetpack/-nxopO-_gVI/MxZHoOv0ddIJ&#34;&gt;working on a plan&lt;/a&gt; to do that automatically for existing add-ons where possible but developers who want to get the benefits right now can just repack their add-ons themselves using SDK 1.14 and using &lt;code&gt;cfx xpi --strip-sdk&lt;/code&gt;, or using the next release of the SDK, 1.15 which will do that by default.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hacking on Tilt</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/03/hacking-on-tilt/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 18:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/03/hacking-on-tilt/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Tilt, or 3D view as it is known in Firefox, is an awesome visual tool that really lets you see the structure of a webpage. It shows you just how deep your tag hierarchy goes which might give signs of your page being too complex or even help you spot errors in your markup that you wouldn’t otherwise notice. But what if it could do more? What if there were different ways to visualise the same page? What if even web developers could create their own visualisations?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Add-on SDK is now in Firefox</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/02/The-Add-on-SDK-is-now-in-Firefox/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 22:06:43 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2013/02/The-Add-on-SDK-is-now-in-Firefox/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;We’re now a big step closer to shipping the SDK APIs with Firefox and other apps, we’ve uplifted the SDK code from our git repository to &lt;code&gt;mozilla-inbound&lt;/code&gt; and assuming it sticks we will be on the trains for releasing. We’ll be doing weekly uplifts to keep the code in &lt;code&gt;mozilla-central&lt;/code&gt; current.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2 id=&#34;whats-changed&#34;&gt;What’s changed?&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Not a lot yet. Existing add-ons and add-ons built with the current version of the SDK still use their own versions of the APIs from their XPIs. Add-ons built with the next version of the SDK may start to try to use the APIs in Firefox in preference to those shipped with the XPI and then a future version will only use those in Firefox. We’re also talking about the possibility of making Firefox override the APIs in any SDK based add-on and use the shipped ones automatically so the add-on author wouldn’t need to do anything.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>What is an API?</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/11/What-is-an-API/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2012 19:27:02 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/11/What-is-an-API/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I recently posted in the newsgroups about a &lt;a href=&#34;https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla.dev.platform/fZV-DYnqQEc/discussion&#34;&gt;concern over super-review&lt;/a&gt;. In some cases patches that seem to meet the policy aren’t getting super-reviewed. Part of the problem here is that the policy is a little ambiguous. It says that any API or pseudo-API requires super-review but depending on how you read that section it could mean any patch that changes the signature of a JS function is classed as an API. We need to be smarter than that. Here is a straw-man proposal for defining what is an API:&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>What is Jetpack here for?</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/10/What-is-Jetpack-here-for/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2012 18:27:17 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/10/What-is-Jetpack-here-for/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Who are the &lt;a href=&#34;https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack&#34;&gt;Jetpack&lt;/a&gt; team? What are they here for? A lot of people in Mozilla don’t know that Jetpack still exists (or never knew it existed). Others still think of it as the original prototype which we dropped in early 2010. Our goals have changed a lot since then. Even people who think they know what we’re about might be surprised at what our current work involves.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let’s start with this basic statement:&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>After an awesome Jetpack work week</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/09/After-an-awesome-Jetpack-work-week/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 19:54:40 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/09/After-an-awesome-Jetpack-work-week/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;It’s the first day back at work after spending a great work week in London with the Jetpack team last week. I was going to write a summary of everything that went on but it turns out that Jeff &lt;a href=&#34;http://canuckistani.ca/blog/2012/09/01/jetpack-work-week/&#34;&gt;beat me to it&lt;/a&gt;. That’s probably a good thing as he’s a better writer than I so go there and read up on all the fun stuff that we got done.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;All I’ll add is that it was fantastic getting the whole team into a room to talk about what we’re working on and get a load of stuff done. I ran a discussion on what the goals of the Jetpack project are (I’ll follow up on this in another blog post to come later this week) and was delighted that everyone on the team is on the same page. Employing people from all around the world is one of Mozilla’s great strengths but also a potential risk. It’s vital for us to keep doing work weeks and all hands like this to make sure everyone gets to know everyone and is working together towards the same goals.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>How Crashplan breaks xpcshell tests on Windows</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/11/how-crashplan-breaks-xpcshell-tests-on-windows/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:15:52 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/11/how-crashplan-breaks-xpcshell-tests-on-windows/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I recently switched to a Windows laptop and have been going through the usual teething pains related. One thing that confused me though was that when I was running xpcshell tests on my new machine they would frequently fail with access denied errors. I’ve seen this sort of thing before so I know some service was monitoring files and opening them after they had changed, when this happens they can’t be deleted or edited until the service closes them again and often tests open, close and delete files so fast that there isn’t time for that to happen.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Adding add-on preferences to the Add-ons Manager</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/07/Adding-add-on-preferences-to-the-Add-ons-Manager/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 19:06:32 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/07/Adding-add-on-preferences-to-the-Add-ons-Manager/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;For some time now Firefox for mobile has had this nice feature where add-ons could embed their preferences right into the list of add-ons, no need to open a whole a new window like add-ons for desktop have to. During the development of Firefox 4 we were a little jealous of what the mobile team had done and so we drew up some ideas for how the same functionality would look on desktop. We didn’t get time to implement them then but I’m excited that someone from the community stepped up and implemented it for us. Not just that but he made the code shared between mobile and desktop, added some new option types and made it work fine for restartless add-ons which are unable to register their own chrome.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Making it easier to check that your plugins are up to date</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/07/Making-it-easier-to-check-that-your-plugins-are-up-to-date/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/07/Making-it-easier-to-check-that-your-plugins-are-up-to-date/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Keeping the software you use up to date is a crucial part of keeping yourself safe while browsing online. At Mozilla we work hard to help you get the most up to date version of Firefox and all the add-ons you have installed. For some time now security updates for Firefox have been installed without you needing to do anything. In Firefox 4 we made extension and theme updates behave similarly.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Why do Firefox updates break add-ons?</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/06/Why-do-Firefox-updates-break-add-ons/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 Jun 2011 00:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/06/Why-do-Firefox-updates-break-add-ons/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Our success in switching to the new rapid release cycle for Firefox has stirred up lots of excitement in the community and I wouldn’t be surprised if that intensifies when we ship the next update to Firefox in 8 weeks time. People keep pointing out that everytime we update Firefox we break add-ons so surely faster releases means add-ons will get broken faster. Many people don’t really understand why Firefox updates should break add-ons anyway so here is my attempt at an explanation and how maybe rapid releases aren’t such a bad thing after all.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Creating custom add-on types just got easier</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/05/Creating-custom-add-on-types-just-got-easier/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 19:01:53 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/05/Creating-custom-add-on-types-just-got-easier/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;One of the nice features that we added to the add-ons manager in Firefox 4 was support for custom add-on types that could be treated the same way as the built-in types, even showing up in the same UI if you did a little work. I &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/How-to-extend-the-new-Add-ons-Manager&#34; title=&#34;How to extend the new Add-ons Manager (or how I built a simple greasemonkey clone in an evening)&#34;&gt;blogged a basic example&lt;/a&gt; of how to do this and I know since then Greasemonkey and Stylish have been using the support.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>How to disable extension compatibility checking on Nightly builds of Firefox</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/05/How-to-disable-extension-compatibility-checking-on-Nightly-builds-of-Firefox/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 22:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/05/How-to-disable-extension-compatibility-checking-on-Nightly-builds-of-Firefox/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;A long long time ago (I can still remember…) we &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/11/Changing-the-checkCompatibility-preference&#34; title=&#34;Changing the checkCompatibility preference&#34;&gt;changed the preference&lt;/a&gt; you use to disable compatibility checking for extensions. We still aim for users to instead use tools like the Add-on Compatibility Reporter to handle this (especially since we are going to start crowdsourcing data from it), but for developers who don’t want to install that but still want to use extensions on their nightly builds the new rapid release model would mean setting a new preference every 6 weeks.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>6 years ago…</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/04/6-years-ago/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2011 09:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2011/04/6-years-ago/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;We were amusing ourselves on IRC yesterday by showing each other the first patches we ever submitted to Mozilla and I suddenly noticed that mine was exactly 6 years ago from today. It was the ridiculously trivial &lt;a href=&#34;https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=292411&#34; title=&#34;Bug 292411 - View Saved Passwords list is blank with animateFadeIn set to true&#34;&gt;bug 292411&lt;/a&gt;, nothing more than a typo correction really. I can remember being quite excited that I had found a bug I could fix and rushing to get it submitted before anyone else. Of course in those days there were no real automated tests so it was a pretty simple process and within a day my patch was reviewed and landed for Firefox 1.5.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Firefox 4 and the Add-ons Manager at Add-on-Con</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/12/Firefox-4-and-the-Add-ons-Manager-at-Add-on-Con/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 04:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/12/Firefox-4-and-the-Add-ons-Manager-at-Add-on-Con/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;As I &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/12/Add-on-Con-is-here&#34;&gt;mentioned before&lt;/a&gt; I was part of a presentation at Add-on-Con this year. Myself, &lt;a href=&#34;http://jboriss.wordpress.com/&#34;&gt;Boriss&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&#34;http://blog.fligtar.com/&#34;&gt;Justin&lt;/a&gt; talked about the new UI changes in Firefox 4 and about the main changes to the add-ons manager. If you’re particularly interested the &lt;a href=&#34;Firefox_4_Add_ons.pdf&#34;&gt;slides are available here&lt;/a&gt; though I guess slides are often just tiny snippets of info from the actual session so if anything catches your eye you’ll need to get in touch and ask us about it.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Add-on-Con is here!</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/12/Add-on-Con-is-here/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 22:32:06 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/12/Add-on-Con-is-here/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Next week is &lt;a href=&#34;http://addoncon.com/&#34;&gt;Add-on-Con 2010&lt;/a&gt; and if you do any work in the add-ons space then you’re probably going to want to take a look at what is going on and hopefully sign up to attend. There are two days this year, one for some training and then the traditional day for keynotes and business/development tracks. I’ll be there for all of the main day and while I don’t think I am going to make the training day I should be there in the evening for the &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.meetup.com/addons/calendar/15494798/&#34;&gt;Mozilla party&lt;/a&gt;, be sure to sign up.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>PreFox is now available for testing</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/09/PreFox-is-now-available-for-testing/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 19 Sep 2010 04:30:02 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/09/PreFox-is-now-available-for-testing/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I’ve finally been able to make some early alpha builds of PreFox, which is clearly a rather unoriginal name for Firefox running on the Palm Pre, available for testing. You can read more and find the builds at the &lt;a href=&#34;http://bit.ly/dvmGJM&#34;&gt;release announcement&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This has been a long time coming, made that much longer by Sprint delaying the release of webOS 1.4.5 and of course Firefox 4 blockers eating into my spare time, I’m hopeful that now both builds and the source code are available some people will start to help out with getting it to be a viable alternative to the default webOS browser. Lots of the remaining work is stuff that is really outside my skill-set.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Don&#39;t miss an exciting opportunity to shape the future of Firefox 4!</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/09/Dont-miss-an-exciting-opportunity-to-shape-the-future-of-Firefox-4/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2010 23:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/09/Dont-miss-an-exciting-opportunity-to-shape-the-future-of-Firefox-4/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;You might have heard of this web-browser. It’s called Firefox. You may have also heard that a new version is due out soon. As my part in its development I have helped completely reshape the way the add-ons manager looks. The good news is that the large bits of the changes are pretty much done, pretty much all that is left is a bunch of UI tweaks and some small behaviour changes.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>How to extend the new Add-ons Manager (or how I built a simple greasemonkey clone in an evening)</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/How-to-extend-the-new-Add-ons-Manager/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 22:30:56 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/How-to-extend-the-new-Add-ons-Manager/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;One of the goals of the new add-ons manager API was to create something that was itself extensible. A couple of times in the past we’ve had to add new types of add-ons to the UI like Plugins and Personas. In both cases squeezing them into the UI was something of a kludge involving a bunch of custom code for each case. We already have a number of new types of add-ons that we want to add, things like search plugins which are currently managed by their own custom UI.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Introducing the new Add-ons Manager</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/Introducing-the-new-Add-ons-Manager/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:51:59 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/Introducing-the-new-Add-ons-Manager/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Add-ons have really been an integral part of Firefox ever since before its first release. In fact Firefox has had an add-ons manager of some form since version 0.2 (which was at that time called Phoenix). Firefox 4 will include a completely redesigned add-ons manager and while many nightly testers will have already seen our work, now the beta release is out I wanted to talk about some of the new features it includes. If you’re interested I’m also writing a companion piece that talks about the &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/History-of-the-Add-ons-Manager&#34;&gt;history of the add-ons manager&lt;/a&gt; from its first appearance through to what the future may bring.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>History of the Add-ons Manager</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/History-of-the-Add-ons-Manager/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/07/History-of-the-Add-ons-Manager/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;With all of the work that has gone into the new add-ons manager for Firefox 4 I thought it would be interesting to take a quick look back at the history of this part of Firefox and a quick look at what the future may hold.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&#34;phoenix-02&#34;&gt;Phoenix 0.2&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Even in the earliest versions of Firefox, extensions were supported using the old XPInstall style packages. These had some pretty fundamental problems though in that there was no built in support for uninstalling extensions nor any way to disable them. There wasn’t even an extension manager window to see what you had installed at first. The very first time that a list of extensions and themes appeared in Firefox was way back in version 0.2, back when the product was called Phoenix. It was a very basic user interface and appeared inside the preferences window.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Documenting the new Add-ons Manager</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/06/Documenting-the-new-Add-ons-Manager/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 16:35:24 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/06/Documenting-the-new-Add-ons-Manager/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I’ve spent some time this week transferring all the API documentation for the new add-ons manager from the Mozilla wiki to the Mozilla Developer Network. This should now be the place to go for the &lt;a href=&#34;https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Addons/Add-on_Manager&#34;&gt;definitive info&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Right now it is pretty dry, for the most part just pure API info with no examples. Before I started working more on that side of things I wanted to ask what kind of examples people might like to see documented?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Support for dropping XPI files into the extension install locations might be going away</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/05/Support-for-dropping-XPI-files-into-the-extension-install-locations/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 23:22:05 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/05/Support-for-dropping-XPI-files-into-the-extension-install-locations/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;For some time now Firefox has supported a way of installing extensions that involves simply copying the extension’s XPI file into one of the &lt;a href=&#34;https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Installing_extensions&#34;&gt;extension install locations&lt;/a&gt;. The next time Firefox runs it would pop up the install dialog for the extension and allow the user to choose whether to install it or not.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I don’t know how many people use this feature and while the code to do it (at least for the profile folder) isn’t terribly complex, it is additional code that may not be necessary. Right now the new add-ons manager doesn’t support it and I’ve heard only a couple of people comment on its absence but nightly testers are by no means representational so I’m asking a little more widely whether people have a real need for keeping this working in Firefox 4?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Add-ons manager re-landed</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/05/Add-ons-manager-re-landed/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:46 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/05/Add-ons-manager-re-landed/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;A little sort of coincidental performance regression forced us to back out the new add-ons manager last week. It has now been re-landed with added bug fixes and should be in tomorrow’s nightly.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The new add-ons manager is here</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/The-new-add-ons-manager-is-here/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 19:34:24 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/The-new-add-ons-manager-is-here/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Finally, after far too much time, the new add-ons manager is about to land in trunk nightlies. I am putting together the final patches to land now. The bit most people will see is the new UI so I guess I’ll steal &lt;a href=&#34;http://jboriss.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/add-ons-manager-redesign-update/&#34;&gt;Boriss’&lt;/a&gt; image for you to look at here with the same caveats. What you see on trunk over the next few days is just the initial steps to switching to a redesigned UI and (more importantly from my point of view) a totally new extension manager backend that will make it easier for us to improve and build upon in the future. The changes are so large that it is important to get more people testing it now while it still looks fairly unpolished so we can pick up problems that we’ve missed.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Myths and mysconceptions about Firefox on the Palm Pre</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/Myths-and-mysconceptions-about-Firefox-on-the-Palm-Pre/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:09:49 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/Myths-and-mysconceptions-about-Firefox-on-the-Palm-Pre/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Since I posted &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/Firefox-running-on-the-Palm-Pre-mostly&#34;&gt;last week&lt;/a&gt; about how I was experimenting with running Firefox on my Palm Pre a number of tech news sites, large and small, picked it up and posted their own take on it. Some of the sites (and some of the readers of those sites) made some fairly odd statements about my work. This is probably because to the uninitiated (and many of the initiated in fact) the internals of Firefox are something of a mystery. I also suspect I made a couple of poor choices of words which led to some misunderstandings so I’d like to try to clarify a couple of points that might make it easier to understand what is going on.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Firefox running on the Palm Pre (mostly)</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/Firefox-running-on-the-Palm-Pre-mostly/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 23:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/Firefox-running-on-the-Palm-Pre-mostly/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;One of the first things I did when I moved to the U.S. was to get myself a smartphone, and that phone was the Palm Pre. I’ve always thought it was way ahead of its competition in terms of the potential of its potential capabilities and platform. Sadly I think it is let down some by build quality and hardware issues, but I still love it as a phone and really hope that if Palm get bought they’ll continue work on it and develop a better 2nd gen version.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>How do restartless add-ons work?</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/How-do-restartless-add-ons-work/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:41:48 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/04/How-do-restartless-add-ons-work/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Look-Ma-no-restarts&#34;&gt;blogged a short time ago&lt;/a&gt; about how we’re adding support for a new form of add-on to Firefox that can install and uninstall without needing to restart the application. Since then I’ve been finalizing a specification for how the platform will load these add-ons, trying to keep it simple but still give developers everything they commonly need. The &lt;a href=&#34;https://wiki.mozilla.org/Extension_Manager:Bootstrapped_Extensions&#34;&gt;planned specification is now available&lt;/a&gt; and if developers have comments then I’d like to hear them. Currently there isn’t a version of Firefox that implements it but that should change in the next day or so when I make the changes to the add-ons manager project branch and very soon when it all lands on trunk.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>How we&#39;re breaking some extensions in the near future</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/How-were-breaking-some-extensions-in-the-near-future/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:09:31 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/How-were-breaking-some-extensions-in-the-near-future/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;You may have read some reports about how we’re re-implementing the bulk of the extension manager in Firefox. It’s been a long running project (something like a year since I first really started planning how to do it). Things are finally started to come together and all being well we are likely to look at landing the first pieces of this on the trunk nightlies in as little as a weeks time. I’ll be up front, this isn’t going to be a perfect landing. There may be some thing that are missing and other bits where the user experience isn’t as perfect as it will be finally. Of course there may also be bugs we have to rush to fix. Despite all this we feel that we’re about at the point where exposing it to the hands of thousands of nightly testers is the best way forward. Your eyes spot things that we miss, even things that may seem obvious to you and you’re vital to us getting these sorts of features polished and really just how they should be before they get released to the world at large in a Firefox release.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Look Ma, no restarts!</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Look-Ma-no-restarts/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:05:11 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Look-Ma-no-restarts/</guid>
      <description>&lt;figure&gt;&#xA;    &lt;a href=&#34;mac_screenshot.png&#34;&gt;&lt;img src=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Look-Ma-no-restarts/mac_screenshot.png&#34; srcset=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Look-Ma-no-restarts/mac_screenshot_hu_5fbc55e9100f8f00.png, https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Look-Ma-no-restarts/mac_screenshot.png 2x&#34; style=&#34;width: 600px&#34; alt=&#34;An extension installed without restarting Firefox&#34;&gt;&#xA;    &lt;/a&gt;&lt;figcaption&gt;Look Ma, no restart!&lt;/figcaption&gt;&lt;/figure&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is a screenshot of some of my latest (and most exciting) work on my project to rewrite the extension manager. I’ve just implemented support for a special kind of extension that can install (and uninstall, and enable, disable, upgrade and anything else you can think of) without the user needing to restart Firefox. This is of course to allow add-ons developed on the Jetpack platform to install without restarts but the feature is going to be available to any extension author, there are just some restrictions to how these extensions work.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Simplifying</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Simplifying/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 02:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2010/03/Simplifying/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;The big project that I have been working on for quite some time now is a complete change to the architecture of the add-ons manager backend. It’s a big scary prospect since (IMHO) the code is pretty crucial to the success of Firefox and many other Mozilla based applications. Without extensions I don’t think we’d be where we are today, in fact it was because of extensions that I got involved in the project in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Changing the checkCompatibility preference</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/11/Changing-the-checkCompatibility-preference/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:31:18 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/11/Changing-the-checkCompatibility-preference/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Back in the mists of time I wrote some code to make nightly testers’ lives easier by giving them a simple preference to flip if they wanted to be able to install and use incompatible extensions. It’s been more than three years since then and the use of this preference has grown beyond its original use. It is now something recommended to regular users everywhere from forums to comments in news articles as a way to use their extensions in the new major Firefox releases.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Lightweight themes UI landed</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/09/Lightweight-themes-UI-landed/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:11:27 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/09/Lightweight-themes-UI-landed/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;As part of the ongoing work to bring basic support for lightweight themes (based on the ideas from the &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.getpersonas.com/&#34;&gt;Personas&lt;/a&gt; extension) into Firefox 3.6 I’ve today landed the main UI parts that allow users to see and select between lightweight themes they have used recently. Dão &lt;a href=&#34;http://design-noir.de/log/2009/09/basic-support-for-lightweight-theming-landed/&#34;&gt;landed most of the backend&lt;/a&gt; last week but we’re still waiting on the support for &lt;a href=&#34;https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=511771&#34;&gt;installing new lightweight themes&lt;/a&gt; before this feature will be truly usable in the development builds. For the time being here is a shot of what the UI looks like in the add-ons manager after you have used some lightweight themes.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Third-party extension installation status</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/09/Third-party-extension-installation-status/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 16:04:05 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/09/Third-party-extension-installation-status/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I have been remiss in not posting a status update about this in two weeks, but that is mostly because we have unfortunately had to slow down work on this feature. The problem is that a string freeze became necessary for all toolkit code (the code shared with the Firefox mobile browser and where this feature would have lived). Unfortunately this all came up over a small period when I was travelling long distances and having to take time out to satisfy immigration authorities that I wasn’t a terrorist intent on bringing down the U.S. government.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Third-party add-on notification progress, the lite edition</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Third-party-add-on-notification-progress-the-lite-edition/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:36:12 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Third-party-add-on-notification-progress-the-lite-edition/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;This week has been the Firefox work week where almost all of the team, including me, made our way to Mountain View. This pretty much means that you spend the entire week in meetings since when you’re remote it can be hard to keep in sync on everything. Of course this means that the amount of coding is pretty low for the week so there isn’t a great deal of progress to report here.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Progress on notifying users about third-party add-ons</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Progress-on-notifying-users-about-third-party-add-ons/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 18:28:41 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Progress-on-notifying-users-about-third-party-add-ons/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;This is a weekly status update on the feature to notify users about add-ons that third-party installers have added to Firefox. You can read more about it in last weeks &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Notifying-users-about-third-party-add-ons&#34;&gt;blog post&lt;/a&gt; or on the &lt;a href=&#34;https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Projects/System_Extension_Notification&#34;&gt;project wiki&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&#34;status&#34;&gt;Status&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;There has been little progress this week mostly due to waiting to see whether the &lt;a href=&#34;https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Projects/Doorhanger_notifications&#34;&gt;doorhanger notifications UI&lt;/a&gt; was going to arrive in time for Firefox 3.6. It looks like it isn’t so instead we are discussing using an in-content page to describe the add-ons that have been installed and allowing users to disable them.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supporting icons for disabled extensions</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Supporting-icons-for-disabled-extensions/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 11:17:57 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Supporting-icons-for-disabled-extensions/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I’ve just landed code that allows extensions to include their icon in the add-ons manager view even when disabled. Currently extensions provide their icon by giving a chrome iconURL for us to load. This can only work when the extension is enabled since we don’t register the chrome otherwise. Themes on the other hand provide their icon as a simple file called “icon.png” alongside the install.rdf. Well extensions can do this too now and it will be used in preference to the iconURL but more importantly works at all times (well not before installation yet, but that is at least feasible this way).&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Notifying users about third-party add-ons</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Notifying-users-about-third-party-add-ons/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 21:48:52 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/08/Notifying-users-about-third-party-add-ons/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;You may have noticed many of the Firefox team starting to blog progress reports on Fridays. This is a part of our new plan to clearly define the &lt;a href=&#34;https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Projects&#34;&gt;main projects&lt;/a&gt; we are all working on and communicate a much as possible about them rather than just having users surprised to see them turn up in nightlies. So here is my report for this week:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I’ve been working on improving the level of information and control we give users over add-ons installed by other applications on the system (think Skype, Java, AV tools etc.). The work for this is being tracked in &lt;a href=&#34;https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=476430&#34;&gt;bug 476430&lt;/a&gt; and on the &lt;a href=&#34;https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Projects/System_Extension_Notification&#34;&gt;project wiki&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving the add-on install experience</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/06/Improving-the-addon-install-experience/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:44:13 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2009/06/Improving-the-addon-install-experience/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Add-on developers face a bit of a challenge when it comes to helping users get the most out of their add-ons. Even once you are past the first hurdle and have got a user to install the add-on, you then need to help them get up and running quickly after Firefox has restarted. Presented with just the blank Firefox window it can be difficult for a user to know where to go next. Many add-on developers have taken to including a first-run experience to give the user some help. Display a webpage with some instructions or open a wizard to start setting up. As this practice started it was generally acceptable. Few add-ons actually did anything so it was helpful. These days though many add-ons are doing it, no doubt with more to come. It is starting to be an annoyance in some cases. Others have already &lt;a href=&#34;http://blog.fligtar.com/2008/10/16/responsible-first-run-usage/&#34;&gt;been discussing&lt;/a&gt; ways that we can improve this.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
