[Project_owners] how does the shellblock.xpi work for FireFox?

Robin Monks devlinks at gmail.com
Sun Jul 11 16:50:58 EDT 2004

Let's barge in on Ben, shall we?  Really, tho.  The reason it was
switched to .rdf was so certain facts would not be omitted, and so
FireFox could uninstall the extension from a central location (EM).

Why not have it so you can just write:
...other info tags...

in the .rdf and have a custom script used instead?  Still having the
info tags in the .rdf to allow for the fancy EM formatting.
  This would be a solution for this problem.  It would be good if all
the ideas that everyone has could be merged into a single
recommendation document and be presented to Ben Goodger on behalf of
those who *program* for firefox, not just the newbie user.


On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 20:29:35 +0200, Karsten Düsterloh <mnenhy at tprac.de> wrote:
> doron aber hob zu reden an und schrieb:
> > Personally, if you need advanced functionality and UI, you could simply
> > have them install new parts after the extension is installed from UI in
> > the extension.  You could in theory write your own xpinstall UI to match
> > your needs and use XPCOM classes to do the installations.  You could
> > have small .xpi files for your optional features, and make sure you
> > install them inside the correct EM dir for your profile for uninstallation.
> Why should I make such enormous efforts, if all that I need is already
> there and available via install.js?
> You are avoiding my question:
> >>>For extensions in FireFox, install.rdf is now used.  install.js will
> >>>still be read if no install.rdf is found.
> >>
> >>It does so *now*.
> >>But will that be the case *in future*?
> Karsten
> Karsten
> --
> Feel free to correct my English. :)
> _______________________________________________
> Project_owners mailing list
> Project_owners at mozdev.org
> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners

More information about the Project_owners mailing list