[Project_owners] XPInstall Js in FireFox
devlinks at gmail.com
Sat Jul 10 19:43:52 EDT 2004
I'll pop in my comments below...
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 17:42:22 -0400, Christopher Ottley
<xknight at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> described as a mess, so I can see why the RDF route is more manageable.
> At first, I also didn't like the idea of needing the RDF when the
> however does 99% of what I need it to do for my MAF project. The last 1%
> (copying some files to a non-chrome directory) was done by a post
> install script in my application itself.
Yes, the idea is that preferences, etc. can be run in a .js that the
installer itself would launch.
> I'm curious to know what more you need from the installer. If it's
> installer APIs you need using XPCOM and "eval" a postinstall.js script.
> I even think you were the one that suggested a
> <em:postinstall>postinstall.js</em:postinstall> addition to the RDF
> based extension manager. Does anyone know if this is being considered by
> version going to be totally duplicated eventually?
Yes, I did suggest that. I'm afraid it was ignored. Too bad too. I
hope it is worked on.
DevLinks | http://newsletter.mozdev.org
cuneAform | http://cuneaform.mozdev.org
OneClick | http://oneclick.mozdev.org
> (Project MAF)
> Robin Monks wrote:
> >I will always use .js. I will never give in... It has so much more
> >power and function. Who would want to go to (gasp!) rdf?
> Project_owners mailing list
> Project_owners at mozdev.org
More information about the Project_owners