On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Aaron Boodman <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Thanks everyone for your feedback and examples.
>
> From this thread and talking to people in person, I came to the
> conclusions that:
>
> a) profile-level and machine-level extension installations are both
> important use cases
> b) there are relatively easy ways to work around the technical problem
> I was having implementing profile-level extension installations
>
> I have a implementation working and I'll be sending it out for comment
> soon.
>

Hmm.  This isn't the conclusion I came to.  First off, I think there was a
bit of confusion in terminology.  People were throwing around per-user vs.
per-machine, and that's not what Aaron was talking about here.  The main
issue right now is that Chrome still has a notion of multiple profiles.
 Even though most users don't use multiple user profile directories, many
use incognito, which is a separate user profile.  Since chrome is currently
installed per-user, this makes things a bit murky when you say
per-installation.  In reality, I think all we're currently talking about is
per-user vs. per-profile.  When we have machine-wide installs again, we can
talk about per-machine extensions.

The second thing I saw people blurring was installation vs. configuration.
 Just because you install the extension doesn't mean it has to be enabled
across all profiles or that it should have the same configuration data.  In
fact, I would argue that by default, they wouldn't be enabled across
profiles and wouldn't share configuration data.

Some of this discussion is also messed up because multiple profiles isn't
really a first class citizen in our UI, so it's unclear how much time we
should spend worrying about the use case.

Here's my take about how things should work
- installation of extensions should be per-user (with the possibility of
per-machine when we have it)
- configuration (including whether or not it's enabled) should be
per-profile
- incognito should be a special case - users can manually disable extensions
for incognito, but we also pass a special flag into extensions when running
in incognito mode so that if they do run, they can behave appropriately
 (ideally this is how we'd like to see plugins work as well)

Erik

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Chromium-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to