The author acknowledges but doesn't go into depth on Manifest V3, and that's basically the only reason I don't really want to write a browser extension.
its bad to churn from v2 to v3 but whats so bad about writing a fresh v3 extension?
For your next side project, make a browser extension
241–250 of 286 posts
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#242Any suggestions for a good stack to develop extensions? I'm coming from nodejs/react, and would like to stay close to that. Is there an up-to-date stack I can clone, copy, and deploy with something like 'yarn run build' and start hacking?
Shameless plug, but we built the Plasmo Framework to make that (and a lot more) super easy: https://github.com/plasmohq/plasmo
heard you guys on the logrocket podcast btw, thank you for taking on this challenging but unexplored market. do you have any design patterns for (as geoffreylitt said) “stably addressing dom elements” in twitter and gmail? i noticed there was a gmail specific extension platform launching here the other day, have yet to try it out tho
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#243Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#244How are people monetizing Chrome extensions? I was under the impression you couldn’t do subscriptions anymore (without bringing in a third party) but you could still charge a one-time purchase fee from the Chrome App Store, is that not the case?
see how tweethunter does it. free to play, then login with paid account for more features
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#245no dont. I would like to see less people doing browser extensions, and more people writing simple servers. so many companies offering free tier, it would be helpful for people to share who they chose and why, and for people to swap recommendations. extensions allow you to bypass the same-origin policy, but they dont give you the full power of a server. plus with a server, you can choose any language you want, you are…
Servers don't give you the power of the frontend, nor can they run in the context of the loaded website. Those are simply different purposes.
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Firefox requires uploading to Mozilla for signing to side load permanently Are you sure? I’ve been sideloading extensions, signed or not, into /usr/lib/firefox/browser/extensions/ and they’ve been working fine.
When was the last time you installed a new extension that way?
Last time was a few weeks ago [0].
I’m also maintaining a couple AUR packages with Firefox extensions myself. They all use the same method for persistence. I’m wondering what kind of issues people are experiencing. Haven’t heard of any myself.
[0]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firefox-extension-multi-a...
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fx on Android allow add-ons. I've used them for years.
Also Kiwi Browser. It's a Chromium fork with extension + adblock support, it even has a developer console.
But the UI is rather klunky. Example is using uBlock Origin to block random element on page.
You must:
1) click kebab menu icon
2) scroll all the way down
3) click ublock icon
4) on another screen click "enter element picker mode"
5) that takes you to the rightmost opened tab (!), so most likely completely different tab than you were using, so you must switch back to your original tab
6) you can finally pick elements
Still, considering that only alternative is Firefox which makes you go to different screen just to switch tab and jump through hoops to be even able to download most extensions, it's still the best Android browser.
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#248For how much this was sold?
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're describing the worst-case thing someone could do with the privilege being granted, because they have no way of saying what the developer will do with the privilege. The way to make the prompt sound less scary, is to use finer-grained permissions where the worst-case thing someone could do is less scary. (Or, if there aren't any fine-grained permissions suited to doing your task — then propose some! The browse…
> They're describing the worst-case thing someone could do with the privilege I understand that - I wrote just that in my comment above. But it's a lot scarier to see a pop-up saying "This extension in the worst case does this", versus the worst-case scenario and a longer explanation. I see from your profile that you're at a web3 analytics company. I'll just say that I think metamask would be a lot less popular if at…
The longer explanation might be correct in the short term, but long term I’m going to assume that you will eventually either take advantage of all that you can do to maximize your revenue or sell the extension to somebody who buys it because users have given that permission and they can exploit that trust.
I think what Google is doing is correct.
Re: For your next side project, make a browser extension
#250I spent some time some productivity extensions, for gmail replies[0] and quick notetaking[1]. It was a lot of fun, but like other people have mentioned, porting to and working with manifest v3 is not as nice. I've noticed also that the way Google asks for permissions from the user is done in human-understandable, but worst-case language. For example, I think there was something where I wanted access to the current ta…
They're describing the worst-case thing someone could do with the privilege being granted, because they have no way of saying what the developer will do with the privilege. The way to make the prompt sound less scary, is to use finer-grained permissions where the worst-case thing someone could do is less scary. (Or, if there aren't any fine-grained permissions suited to doing your task — then propose some! The browse…
> (Or, if there aren't any fine-grained permissions suited to doing your task — then propose some! The browser vendors would love to get real feedback on the kinds of fine-grained hypothetical privileges that extensions authors would actually find useful. Otherwise they're stuck reading the source code of a small sample of extensions, and extrapolating general patterns of privilege-use from there.)
We did, related to adblocking, they ignored it