Thanks for sharing this! It does sound like a more modern workflow. I see automated test support as a big benefit, since I'll admit I don't even know how you would go about doing that for our regular bootstrap.js add-ons.
In the past I made this repo to collect Firefox for Android add-on bolierplate code and snippets: https://github.com/mozilla/firefox-for-android-addons Maybe we can update this to also talk about this new jpm way of doing things (or deprecate it if we see this jpm way as the future). As much as this copy/paste bootstrap.js method of writing add-ons is "simple", it favors people who already have a bunch of Mozilla-specific knowledge, and I would like to make this as approachable as possible. My main concern is encouraging a dependency on something we're not responsible for (the "breakage" that rnewman mentioned), as well as Yet Another Way to write Mozilla add-ons. Margaret On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Richard Newman <[email protected]> wrote: > It was brought to my attention that some of you don't know how to use the >> add-on sdk to make mobile add-ons nor how awesome that can be. Please >> allow me to explain this for a moment, by providing a step by step guide: >> > > > Thanks for the steps, Erik! > > For those of us who have historically avoided taking a dependency on the > add-on SDK to avoid unnoticed breakage and bloat, could you spend 30 > seconds to explain what it buys us over the tiny restartless add-ons that > we already write directly against the bootstrap API and Fennec's own > interfaces? > > (A trivial example of one: <https://github.com/rnewman/about-pages>) > > Presumably "less boilerplate" is one thing, but I'm interested to know > what else is waiting for us. > > _______________________________________________ > mobile-firefox-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mobile-firefox-dev > >
_______________________________________________ mobile-firefox-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mobile-firefox-dev
