Is there a web extensions port planned

[IzzySoft]

As with FF57 legacy addons will stop working: Are you planning to port it?

[Ede123]

At this point it's highly unlikely.

• I'm busy with other projects right now (that are much more fun than fixing what Mozilla deliberately breaks)
• Webextensions are by far too limited and whatever one could come up with is bound to be inferior to the current extension. That's something I cannot stand at all and it kills my motivation from the start!
• If I ever spend time on browser add-ons again it will likely be independent from Mozilla (i.e. either for a Firefox fork or if I really don't get around using webextensions I can just as well look into Chrome).

If it did not become obvious already: I'm done with Mozilla!

When FF57 hits I'll likely continue to use an ESR release for some time and hope a fork consolidates that reverses the stupidities Mozilla came up with. If none emerges I'll probably switch to Chrome (it's as limiting as FF57 will be, but at the very least it offers better performance in return and the features they do provide usually work - nothing that could be said of Mozilla/Firefox).

While I'm actually a big enemy of proprietary software and Google in particular, Mozilla achieved what I thought no FLOSS organization could achieve: They're worse!

[IzzySoft]

Sad, but understandable. I feel exactly the same (except I'm unwilling to go Chrome – though FF will, starting with v57, be not much more than a cheap clone of that). It's the third time Mozilla crippled it, making it 1) look like Chrome (Australis), 2) feel like Chrome (signing and "bound to their store" for addons), and now 3) behave like Chrome. So you've got my full understanding for taking the original instead. What Mozilla never learned about FOSS is the community part: FOSS goes with the community, not against it as they have it now.

Checking the charts in this extensive GDocs sheet shows that only about a quarter of the addons will survive (most of them crippled) as WebExts, with more than half of the community affected. Great step 😞 A long way down from Phoenix, the initial (and great) idea of a light-weight "core engine" users could fit with the features they needed (by means of addons – and yes, that's when I started using it, at around v0.8) – to a heavy-weight monolit the average user doesn't need half of (which average user even knows of the integrated DOMInspector and other DeveloperTools stuff, not to speak of needing that?)

I wish there were a real alternative. Maybe one comes up when FF57 becomes real. Hope dies last …

So thanks for your fast reply and open words. Good luck for you, wherever your road might lead you!

[HyperCriSiS]

I suggest you try Waterfox. I also use this Firefox fork and they want to stay compatible with the old extensions!
I really hope that the more addon devs try this. Chrome sucks :(

Waterfox features:
Disabled Encrypted Media Extensions (EME)
Disabled Web Runtime (deprecated as of 2015)
Removed Pocket
Removed Telemetry
Removed data collection
Removed startup profiling
Allow running of all 64-Bit NPAPI plugins
Allow running of unsigned extensions
Removal of Sponsored Tiles on New Tab Page
Addition of Duplicate Tab option
Locale selector in about:preferences > General

What’s new in Waterfox 56.0?
Waterfox will now remain at 56 for the time being, following the security releases of 59 ESR until it becomes End of Line (Q1 2019). In the meanwhile, a “new” browser will be developed to follow the ethos of Waterfox of customisation and choice, while staying up to do date with the rapidly evolving browser landscape.

[IzzySoft]

Waterfox is what I use as well meanwhile (for reasons similar to @HyperCriSiS I guess). Plus there's also Pale Moon compatible to the "old extension interface". So maybe you could keep the project alive for those? Not that big audience as with Mozilla, but still a decent user base.

[Ede123]

Are there any incompatibilities with those browsers?

I've never used them (but I'm certainly considering switching to one of those myself - still on Firefox 56.0.2 here 😮), so yes, in principle I'd like to know what's missing in order to support them.

[IzzySoft]

@Ede123 I've switched from FF56 to WF56 a while ago at the office, and had no issues. Got two little ones with the 56.2 update (one of them solved already), but that could have happened with FF as well (and indeed, the remaining issue has on a machine I'm still running FF56 on – so it's not a fault of Waterfox).

Both Waterfox and Pale Moon have their pros and cons: PM has a larger team, but is somehow stuck at the level of pre-Aurora (FF28), so no WebExts. WF has the smaller team, but supports WebExts as well as XUL/XPComm. Both are currently well maintained – so take your pick 😉

[dan9980]

Cyberfox browser
https://8pecxstudios.com/Forums/index.php