On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Aaron Boodman <[email protected]> wrote: > Right now, the extension system treats any downloaded file that ends > in ".crx" as an extension. > > This seems like a bad idea, and that we should use a content type.
You have two use cases in mind here, and I think your solutions are mixing them. In the (rare) case where someone has the correct mime type set, we should obey the mime type and do no sniffing. I think that's non-controversial. That leaves the "user cannot set the mime type" case. So we're getting application/octet-stream or whatever and the question is how to upgrade from that to an extension install. It seems to me the filename extension is more obvious to a developer than any scary heuristic. Options here (I can't tell if you're suggesting #2 or #3): 1) filename extension only (what I'm suggesting) 2) require both filename extension and sniffing to match (seems to be only minimally different from option #1 -- the delta is cases where you have a .crx that is *not* an extension, but you'll also have this with corrupt extension files where you ought to have some UI to handle it anyway) 3) ignore filename, try sniffing out of other app/octet-stream files. Seems unpredictable to me. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
