Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox Test Pilot

testpilot.firefox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 152 posts

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#61

Post by chuckharmston »

danielweber wrote: post #55
6a68 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about the doorhanger that appears when you try to install the add-on? Firefox always shows a warning doorhanger if an add-on is installed from a website other than addons.mozilla.org. What you're seeing is a Mozilla web property following the same rules as every other website. Nothing to worry about.

What is a doorhanger?

A doorhanger is a term for this sort of warning notification: http://i.imgur.com/huWjWjq.png

As 6a68 mentioned, Firefox presents this doorhanger whenever any site other than addons.mozilla.org attempts to install an add-on.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#62

Post by mrmondo »

Honestly all I want from Firefox is better stability and performance - I don't care about almost anything else barring security. Firefox has become so unstable and slow (on OSX at least) that many people I know - myself included have switched to chromium. We don't want to use it but we have to because of all the crashes and massive slowdowns during long running sessions or when many tabs are open. This goes for stable, dev edition and nightly. It really saddens me and I'm sure others because of the great work that Mozilla does especially with regards to transparency, privacy and security.

Edit: I'm also in two minds about the plugin systems between the two browsers. The idea of all JavaScript plugins scares me to death, there really are no good download managers for chromium / chrome, on the other hand Firefox plugins I rely on like Evernote web clipper keep breaking and don't even work on dev/nightly when enforcing the new plugin system.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#63

Post by 6a68 »

Blaaguuu wrote: post #49
dingaling wrote: post #44

What a curious page; just blank-white in Firefox 46.0 on Linux with this output in the console: "You have google analytics blocked. We understand. Take a look at our privacy policy to see how we handle your data."

Huh... I'm on Chrome in Windows 10, and I have Google Analytics blocked, and the rest of the page loads fine for me.

Yeah, the site is templated client-side using Ampersand (though lmorchard keeps threatening to rewrite it in React as a weekend project). Should work fine with tracking disabled, but won't work at all without JS.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#64

Post by 6a68 »

mrmondo wrote: post #62

Honestly all I want from Firefox is better stability and performance - I don't care about almost anything else barring security. Firefox has become so unstable and slow (on OSX at least) that many people I know - myself included have switched to chromium. We don't want to use it but we have to because of all the crashes and massive slowdowns during long running sessions or when many tabs are open. This goes for stabl…

Test Pilot isn't happening at the cost of stability and performance improvements. It's a complementary program that helps us ship better features through data-driven iteration.

I hear your concerns, though. The platform and desktop teams are doing tons of great work on improving stability and performance--you might want to give Firefox another try sometime. If you do, maybe try out some Test Pilot experiments while you're at it, and let us know what you think.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#65

Post by dfc »

6a68 wrote: post #52
dfc wrote: post #50

Why do we encourage users to override security protections? I click "get started now", and am presented with a warning message reminiscent of an ssl cert error. In general when users see the "this site is trying to install software" warning message I hope they become suspicious and do something else (certainly not override the warning dialog). I am not entirely sure why that should not be the case now. I am inclined…

Are you talking about the doorhanger that appears when you try to install the add-on? Firefox always shows a warning doorhanger if an add-on is installed from a website other than addons.mozilla.org. What you're seeing is a Mozilla web property following the same rules as every other website. Nothing to worry about.

What you are seeing is an eve.com web property following the same rules as every other website. Nothing to worry about, install malware...

Why is the add-on not hosted on addons.m.o? I thought mozilla thought there was some benefit to users when they only installed things from addons.m.o.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#66

Post by jeena »

6a68 wrote: post #63
Blaaguuu wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh... I'm on Chrome in Windows 10, and I have Google Analytics blocked, and the rest of the page loads fine for me.

Yeah, the site is templated client-side using Ampersand (though lmorchard keeps threatening to rewrite it in React as a weekend project). Should work fine with tracking disabled, but won't work at all without JS.

Oh wow, this is one of the simple designs which only needs HTML and CSS, no JS at all to work, I wonder why they chose to do it this way.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#67

Post by lmorchard »

dfc wrote: post #65
6a68 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about the doorhanger that appears when you try to install the add-on? Firefox always shows a warning doorhanger if an add-on is installed from a website other than addons.mozilla.org. What you're seeing is a Mozilla web property following the same rules as every other website. Nothing to worry about.

What you are seeing is an eve.com web property following the same rules as every other website. Nothing to worry about, install malware... Why is the add-on not hosted on addons.m.o? I thought mozilla thought there was some benefit to users when they only installed things from addons.m.o.

A few reasons, among which is that the addon needs an account on the Test Pilot site to work. It's not a standalone add-on, so we didn't want to distribute it that way. And we may eventually even migrate away from using an AMO compatible add-on.

That said, we are also contemplating AMO hosting as an interim step. At the same time, we're having a conversation about how alarming those warning messages look. We were also trying this way to kind of dogfood self-hosted addons outside of AMO. So, lots of things converging on this one thing :/

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#68

Post by sametmax »

mrmondo wrote: post #62

Honestly all I want from Firefox is better stability and performance - I don't care about almost anything else barring security. Firefox has become so unstable and slow (on OSX at least) that many people I know - myself included have switched to chromium. We don't want to use it but we have to because of all the crashes and massive slowdowns during long running sessions or when many tabs are open. This goes for stabl…

Big fan of mozilla and firefox. I've been defending it for years, but now I'm having a hard time. It's slower in almost any case than the competition, from initial rendering to switching tabs. Some stuff hang the page completly. Watching too many videos or scrolling too much twitter slow down the browser to a crawl even after closing all tabs and require a restart.

I'm not using firefox out of sheer ideology and support for the FOSS community, but it's not the superior product I used to sell to everybody.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#69

Post by rhinoceraptor »

callahad wrote: post #27
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great! So now in like 2 years, hopefully I can simply use type="time" instead of implementing a half baked JS time picker or time validator. It's frustrating seeing them spend so much time on Firefox OS, Hello, etc. and not on making Firefox a really good, standards compliant browser.

You asked us to implement X. We confirmed that we've begun work on implementing X and provided a way you can follow the progress. You then chose to respond with sarcasm and disdain. What productive outcome could we possibly reach from that exchange?

Sorry for being rude. It comes from a place of love, I think Firefox plays an extremely important role in the open web, and for that I'm very grateful.

Re: Firefox Test Pilot

#70

Post by rhinoceraptor »

6a68 wrote: post #35
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great! So now in like 2 years, hopefully I can simply use type="time" instead of implementing a half baked JS time picker or time validator. It's frustrating seeing them spend so much time on Firefox OS, Hello, etc. and not on making Firefox a really good, standards compliant browser.

I hear your frustration; people inside the company found some of those changes frustrating, too. Test Pilot is a step in a new direction that's more participatory and inclusive of the community, and injects a lot of data into the decision-making process. As far as web standards go, Gecko's the only open-source browser controlled by a nonprofit. The alternative is a webkit monoculture, a world controlled by Apple and…

I really appreciate that, I would hate for the web to be controlled by Google/Microsoft/Apple and Mozilla is in the best position to stop that from happening.
Post reply on HN