I had also thought that a revise of ChromeBug was in order, until I started using NodeJS. With a little bit of work to turn the NodeJS .EXE into a service, it allows the server hosting to occur as a localhost, with the absolutely simple use of a single executable! NODE.EXE. Running NODE.EXE on the client eliminates most needs for plugins and does not require the broken security model which non-certified plugIns create.
NodeJS is not without its own pain, but it creates a single paradigm for any requirement that needs unrestricted access to the client PC. Now the plug-ins become NODEJS plug-ins. Instead of trusting your Mozilla plug-in, you need to trust your NODEjs apps. I know that "...NodeJS is the answer" may not be what FFx/Mozilla afficionados want to hear, but there is no way that any technology can approach the legacy and proven install-base of FFx/XUL. Each piece has a role to play and to blur these is a mistake. I am developing a a tool, soon to be delivered to 18,000 clients who need to operate in an offline mode, with access to "host" storage (i.e. their own hard-drives), which I am providing via NODEjs on the client. The reason I am using FFx/XUL is that this is the only way I can completely control my sandbox. I have a single operating target environment (i.e. whichever XULRunner I choose to install). That XULRunner will work with decades-old PCs without any conflict with any versions of any browsers. And I don't have to worry about different browser providers or even old FFx versions-- only the XULRunner that I choose to package with my tool. If the client has FFx, it is not an issue! The legacy of hard working Mozilla committed developers worldwide for the last decade have already proven that this target sandbox will be install-able. I can leave the details of that install to the folks at Installshield or some other similar tool and spend my time developing in a world of knowns. Thank you Mozilla committed developers for making this possible and for continuing to improve Firebug and the environment it supports. On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Sebastian Zartner < [email protected]> wrote: > On Saturday, July 14, 2012 6:26:53 AM UTC+2, Sid wrote: >> >> Yeh I thought about that, if they even sell the extinction for like $1.99 >> they will be able to provide some sort of support for it. >> > I didn't see that comment earlier. > I hope you mean extension and not extinction. ;-) Firebug is open source > and freeware. So there's nothing to sell. And if you mean, we should charge > money for it, there would still be a lack of resources. > > Again, everyone willing to start working on such a project is welcome to > do so. > > > Sebastian > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Firebug" 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 > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/firebug > -- Ken Amron Digital Parts, Inc. 877.374.4300 ext. 567 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" 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 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/firebug
