On 05/12/2015 16:44, Mark Banner wrote: > Note that for add-ons dropping xul etc has been already communicated as > part of other plans: > > https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-developing-firefox-add-ons/
And this is another huge threat to our businesses that was not discussed with us first. In the case of BlueGriffon, the editor is OSS and free to download and use. We sell XUL-based add-ons. > One of the things that stuck out for me from the discussions we had, was > that we don't really know how hard moving away from XUL will be - > there's various performance concerns, if things can be done in HTML or > not, and many other things. We'll need to work to resolve these, but > there's currently too many unknowns to be able to scope/estimate the > project. The initial idea, as Gijs commented, was to try and start > moving various parts of Firefox and see what the real issues actually were. Performance is one thing. I still remember hyatt's tests to make the XUL tree handle 30,000 rows... But reaching native UI completeness or at least at the level of XUL and XBL is another thing and it's going to be quite tricky. Did I ever mention that WebComponents are not simpler than XBL, far from it even?-) </Daniel> _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
