Re: Firefox plugins in Epiphany

["Diego Escalante" <dieguito gmail com>]

Who said GUADEC Ephy-extensions party?

On 3/20/07, Adam Hooper <adamh densi com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 23:03 +0000, Olafur Arason wrote:
> > I think a better system would be to stub the XPCom function
> > and implement those that the extension use and use
> > dbus to communicate. Because firefox is better at handling
> > there extensions.
>
> I think the better system is to rewrite the extensions. I have yet to
> port a well-engineered Firefox extension. My opinion is that Epiphany's
> extensions should strive to be of better quality and reliability than
> their Firefox counterparts.
>
> PyXPCOM would help immensely with porting extensions *very* easily.
> Unfortunately, on Ubuntu at least, the python-xpcom package is missing a
> vital component at the moment. Everything is technically feasible, and
> the hard parts have been written. It just comes down to some skilled C
> hacker taking a day or two to package everything together.
>
> --
> Adam Hooper
> adamh densi com
>
> _______________________________________________
> epiphany-list mailing list
> epiphany-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/epiphany-list