Comments on: NetUtil.jsm Just Got More Useful

By: Wladimir Palant

Wladimir Palant — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:50:54 +0000

Yes, I also thought that people using add-ons are using up-to-date Firefox versions – until I discovered that quite a few of them don’t and you will get bug reports if you specify minVersion as 3.0.11 rather than 3.0.12. And documentation will also get you only so far, many add-on authors don’t seem to read any documentation whatsoever.

By: Mike Shaver

Mike Shaver — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:49:18 +0000

I don’t think that’s much of a problem — easy to catch and deal with, and most users (esp, IMO, those who install add-ons) are updated anyway. We can document it explicitly, too.

By: Wladimir Palant

Wladimir Palant — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 22:10:18 +0000

Mike, I am not sure whether this is a good idea. Having a feature supported in 3.6.2 but not 3.6.1 might confuse extension developers – if it works in most recent 3.6 nobody will verify that it works in older 3.6 releases as well. As a result we might get extensions with wrong compatibility range. While these additions are nice, they aren’t really essential, so maybe better wait for 3.7 (and sure, it sucks to write code that nobody will use for at least half a year).

By: Shawn Wilsher

Shawn Wilsher — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:32:19 +0000

We should be able to. We haven’t been willing to do that in the past, so I didn’t bother requesting it. Fully tested too, so we’ll know if it works or not.

By: Mike Shaver

Mike Shaver — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:43:32 +0000

Should we back-port them? They look additive.

By: Wladimir Palant

Wladimir Palant — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:24:53 +0000

Thank you, Shawn. Too bad that all these changes landed only for 1.9.3 – meaning that it will most likely take two years until I can start using that module.

By: drew

drew — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 09:24:32 +0000

http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/6453f3ca39fc
\o/