6 ms·

For my extension Saka Key (https://github.com/lusakasa/saka-key https://github.com/lusakasa/saka-key), I decided to use the browser.* APIs on both Chrome and Fi

For my extension Saka Key (https://github.com/lusakasa/saka-key https://github.com/lusakasa/saka-key), I decided to use the browser.* APIs on both Chrome and Firefox using Mozilla's web extensions polyfill. https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill The biggest challenge for me was addressing browser incompatibilities and Firefox bugs. This is a big one: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1193394 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1193394 Another is that Firefox doesn't fire blur events when DOM elements are removed or hidden. The Firefox approval process is slow. Mine took 3 months the first time, < 10 days the second time, and this third time it's taking over a month. Chrome's reviewal process is really nice. It usually takes <30 minutes.

Sylos 9y ago
>Chrome's reviewal process is really nice. It usually takes <30 minutes. Nice for the extension developer, but there's a reason for Mozilla's longer review process. They actually sit down human beings to look over the code and that makes all the difference in keeping AMO clean from malware.
- ChrisSD 9y ago
  Case in point, a recent phishing attack on Chrome extension developers: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/after-phishing-attacks-chrome-extensions-push-adware-to-millions/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/after...
- chris_wot 9y ago
  Won't this just decentralise add-on distribution away from the Firefox add-ons store?
  - toyg 9y ago
    Most people never install any extension from third-party sites. As long as Firefox keeps the search features as they are, very few will ever venture outside addons.mozilla.org.