Neil P Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 In part two of this month's newsletter, Scot again talks about Firefox, in a followup to last issues article (forum thread here).The problem seems to have been related to an unruly extension, User Agent Switcher. Removing it seems to have fixed the issue he was having.This again brings up the point: How should mozilla.org handle extensions? If they're going to routinely cause problems--ones that make Firefox act up, and break down--what is the proper course here?Scot offers, To that I would add that extensions should be forced to follow explicit, prescribed rules that prevent issues like those so many people have experienced. And if they don't pass the test, they should not allowed to be added to the browser. If that means that Mozilla must limit automatic extension installation only to code that is hosted on its own servers, so be it. Mozilla must actively guard the user experience. It's not enough just to build a light-weight browser that's fast and pleasant to use. To truly compete, Mozilla must deliver the full package of goods.I don't know that I agree. I do agree that something needs to be done, but I don't know what the solution needs to be. I think that too many rules and restrictions might lead to creativity being stifled, and might turn away some extension developers who might otherwise create some great extensions that do magical things.Also, mozilla.org simply does not have the manpower to test and certify all of the extensoins--it's just not feasible currently.In my eyes, this is a tough problem. What are your thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.