On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Erik Kay<erik...@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Aaron Boodman <a...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Matt Perry<mpcompl...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Aaron Boodman <a...@chromium.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> a) I think it is important to not break the extension system with this
>> >> mod, so that means that for awhile (1 or 2 dev channel releases?) we
>> >> will both write the entire manifest to the prefs and load from disk
>> >> normally.
>> >
>> > What if on extension load, we checked the prefs first, and if the
>> > manifest
>> > entry was absent, then we loaded from disk? New extension installs
>> > would
>> > write only to the pref. Seems like that would get us transparent
>> > backwards
>> > compat.
>>
>> You're right, that is another way to do it.
>
> +1 to Matt's approach here.
On second thought, I don't like Matt's approach. It would require
writing lots of new, temporary, code to lazily load extensions, and to
wait for them to load before firing EXTENSIONS_READY. My original
suggestion, to just let loading carry on as it does today and to write
preferences when done would result in little new code.
> Random wacky thought: perhaps validation could be done using JSON schema?
> (although it doesn't really fit in this case since this is running in the
> browser)
We really need a C++ implementation of JSON Schema to do that. It
isn't that hard, but I don't really have the motivation since we
already have the validation code.
- a
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
