Developer support for changes in add-on development

As you may have heard, there are a lot of changes coming up for add-on development. By the end of 2017, we will transition to WebExtensions as the standard for creating add-ons. Over the same period of time, existing methods for add-on development such as XUL/XPCOM will be deprecated. Multi-process Firefox (aka Electrolysis, or e10s) is also rolling out, which means some developers will have to update their add-on more than once. All this on the heels of add-on signing.

In the past few weeks, we’ve been gathering all the information and resources we could to help developers navigate the upcoming changes. We’re also lining up new content so we can continue to keep everyone informed and supported during this adjustment period.

Everything we’ve collected so far is here. A few notable pieces of information you’ll find:

  • A lookup tool you can use to see if your add-on will be impacted, and if so what the recommended migration path is.
  • A survey you can use to tell us which WebExtension APIs you need, so we can better prioritize them.
  • A timeline of changes that includes dates to the best of our knowledge. This is a working doc and will be updated as we learn of new information.
  • A calendar you can add to see upcoming meetings, blog posts, and office hours. We will also be adding release milestones to the calendar in the coming weeks.

Blog posts and other documentation related to the transition are added here as they’re created. We have more content queued up, and as you can see we could use even more. If you’re interested in writing about your experience creating a WebExtension add-on, or becoming e10s compatible, or anything else that others might find relevant, please sign up here.

We’ll keep releasing information on the wiki as they become available. If you have ideas or would like to pitch in, please reach out to us. We’re here to help.

4 responses

  1. Mindaugas J. wrote on :

    Personally, I find it weird that the API survey which supposedly asks about WebExt APIs instead has SDK APIs as options. While this may be easier for SDK users, it does not resonate with me who uses XPCOM (mainly Services.jsm) in a bootstrapped add-on and Google Chrome APIs for a Chrome port.

    I am aware WebExt API usage statistics have been gathered from CWS so I don’t know what other data you actually seek and what is the actual purpose of any such surveys. FWIW I have already CCed/voted on the WebExt bugs that matter to me.

    1. Noitidart wrote on :

      Nice I am also a bootstrap addon guy who uses Services.jsm only in bootstrap. The heavy lifting I do in ChromeWorkers. And framescripts have no XPCOM. Sometimes I do need to use inIDOMUtils.

  2. Marilyn MONROE wrote on :

    Is add-ons like google apps and themes where you can download things and apps in 2.2 seconds and it is there??????

    1. Amy Tsay wrote on :

      Yes, add-ons are like apps and themes that you can download to modify and personalize your experience of Firefox.