webextension-polyfill

Not yet! there are ways to do it with https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill but i want to focus on one thing at a time for now! BTW firefox was my main driver before starting develop for the web, then i realized it has a 5% share so it is better for me to focus on chrome for now. Will revisit if i get 1000 users on chrome or if many people ask for it.

I've been on Firefox Dev Edition for Mac for the last 4 years I think, and I can't remember more than 1 or 2 websites that didn't work correctly on it. It's been flawless, more battery and memory efficient than Chrome, less finicky and problematic than Safari, and with all the extensions that I need. I seriously don't see any disadvantage in picking Firefox over Chrome. I still have Chrome around if any website requires it specifically, but I haven't launched it in ages. There were a few Chrome extensions that weren't there on Firefox [1] [2] but I fixed that _easily_ by getting the crx file, unpacking it, then adding the https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill to the extension to make it cross-browser. It's easy enough to make an extension work on both Firefox and Chrome, I've done it myself with SideHN (https://github.com/alin2

The only really difference sometimes is in the manifest. If you target the webextension api and use the Mozilla poly fill library, your code base does not need to be duplicated at all. It adds the benefit of being able to use all API calls in a promise based manner instead of needing to use callbacks. Edit: To give it a bit more context (although you can find that in other comments I left under this post). The polyfill library itself: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill Which if included allows you to swap out `chrome` callback based calls for promise based `browser` calls. So instead of using `chrome.extension.api.call(() => { // callback})` you do something like `await browser.extension.api.call()` with the same results working in both browsers. Then the only thing where you still need some separation is for the manifest a

> The docs supplied by Google are quite good! They are okayish in my book. Personally, I prefer using the MDN docs [0][1] for web extensions as I am using mozilla's polyfill library [2] anyway. These contain more practical examples and less abstract descriptions at times, including a very thorough getting started guide [3] going over everything including various concepts. The point remains the same though, the basics aren't all that difficult and while Plasmo does seem to make some aspects easier it also seems like overkill in other areas in regard to abstraction. [0] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web... [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web... [2] https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill [3] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web...

Technically correct, but it is a bit more complex. The original web extension API is based on the chrome extension API. So most (there are some annoying exceptions at times) of the chrome extension API calls also work with very little adjustment on firefox. It becomes even easier when you use mozilla's polyfill library https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill Then you can just target the promise based webextension syntax and as long as you still stick to the calls also available in chrome your extension works with very little effort in both browsers. Safari is a different story which basically amounts to Apple being Apple and sort of supporting webextensions but in such a roundabout way that it is barely worth it for the majority of extension devs.

Porting this extension to Firefox should be relatively straightforward using the webextension polyfill: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill

Indeed I have issue here. Firefox maintain a library for unified extension API https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill Their type definition for HAR request isn't exported https://github.com/DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped/blob/mast... So I can't drop in replace the type on https://github.com/AndrewWalsh/openapi-devtools/blob/main/sr...

This is pretty cool, bundle it with webextension-polyfill [0] and you can release it as a decent NPM package. [0] https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill

There's standardization work being done at the moment with the W3C WebExtensions Community Group [1] which is definitely a step in the right direction! Mozilla has also done some great work building a web extension polyfill library that attempts to abstract away the differences between the browsers [2] but the translation will always be imperfect, and edge cases are abundant. [1]: https://www.w3.org/community/webextensions/ [2]: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill

I've written extensions before and Firefox has a very good polyfill [0] that makes it quite easy to write extensions for all browsers. It does get a bit trickier if you also want to incorporate TypeScript [1] or React however. [0] https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill [1] https://github.com/Lusito/webextension-polyfill-ts

I used WebExtension polyfill[0] when adapting my FF addon to Chrome and admittedly all the intricate differences between APIs still costed me half a day of work. I managed to have it done with only a few places where I branch on navigator.vendor, but If I wanted to ship different versions to AMO and CWS, I'd make use of something like DefinePlugin[1] for webpack to include/exclude code based on build target. [0] https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill/ [1] https://github.com/webpack/docs/wiki/list-of-plugins#definep...

I mean, the browser apis are close (and Mozilla still has much better documentation) but there are a LOT of edges cases where behavior diverges. Frankly - I'm a little peeved that Optional permissions in Firefox are STILL broken - The prompt can only be triggered in response to a user action, and Firefox blows the fuck up if you put a promise anywhere in between the user click and the call to the api. Which is hugely ironic, since Mozilla is the one pushing to move all the webext APIs to be promise based (and provides a nice helpful library for Chrome/Edge/Safari support: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill) which... doesn't work on their platform. Doubly ironic, since the result is that most FF extensions just ask for more permissions up front, which is exactly the opposite of what you'd want in the "secure/private" world

Yes: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill

I'm going through converting a Chrome extension to Safari 14, and the process isn't nearly as seamless as shown, although it's nice to have the converter tool. Chrome extensions only support the 'chrome' namespace, while Firefox supports 'chrome' and 'browser', but Safari 14 only supports 'browser'. So our extension had been using the 'chrome' namespace which worked under Firefox, but now needed to be converted. 'chrome' uses callback functions, while 'browser' uses Promises. So you have to port your Chrome extension to use 'browser' and use the following polyfill: https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill Here's some incompatibilities between Chrome and Firefox to consider: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web... Also had some html/css glitches to fix in Safari. Some other issues others have mentioned such

For more information and tools, see https://youtu.be/6jgBM8twUIQ https://github.com/mozilla/webextension-polyfill