webextension-polyfill

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.