Uninstalling disabled add-ons in Firefox 6.0?

[mart44]

Mozilla has moved Firefox (and Thunderbird, too) onto a rapid release plan. Instead of "sub" version releases (x.1, x.2, etc.) every 6 weeks, starting with Fx 4,
major versions are planned on being released every 6 week. This mimics what Google has been doing with Chrome for some time now.

If both make releases every 6 weeks, I suppose Firefox might never actually catch up or overtake in version numbers ..unless Firefox releases can go even faster than now.

[ldb]

Mozilla has moved Firefox (and Thunderbird, too) onto a rapid release plan. Instead of "sub" version releases (x.1, x.2, etc.) every 6 weeks, starting with Fx 4,
major versions are planned on being released every 6 week. This mimics what Google has been doing with Chrome for some time now.

Just as you say that, version 6.01 was released today.

[WildcatRay]

Just as you say that, version 6.01 was released today.

The reason why:

Firefox 6.0.1 and Firefox 3.6.21 revoke the root certificate for DigiNotar due to fraudulent SSL certificate issuance. For additional details, see http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/08/29/fraudulent-google-com-certificate.

Oh, and, Fx 6 to 6.0.1 is much different than Fx 6 to Fx 7.

[bobprimak]

And to make things even more difficult,Mozilla is talking about hiding the version numbers completely from users, so that we will never even know which version we are running or upgrading to. Really smart move, Mozilla folks -- NOT!!

[jwitalka]

Bob, Mozilla backed down on hiding version numbers. See:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/m...-numbers/14427

Jerry

[WildcatRay]

Additional information regarding why Fx went from 6 to 6.0.1: http://blog.mozilla.com/security/201...val-follow-up/

[ldb]

And now there is a 6.02 version available for download. It is however not showing up as an upgrade yet.

[bobprimak]

Bob, Mozilla backed down on hiding version numbers. See:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/m...-numbers/14427

Jerry

Good news. Now, as one of the Comments there says, if only Mozilla would stop breaking the add-ons with each full-version upgrade.

My point in including that comment is, hiding the version number was only a symptom of a much larger issue at Mozilla Development. They lack centralized and strong leadership, and so everyone seems to go off in multiple directions without much coordination. This is exactly the kind of disorganization which plagues much of Open Source program development. The inability to get a working Java Console, Java QuickStarter, and inability to produce a rational way for Java updates to remove Mozilla plug-ins, are all part of this lack of coordinated development in Firefox. The sudden abandonment of traditional Themes in favor of Personas in Firefox 4 and the abandonment of the UserChrome folder is yet another example of poorly coordinated development. Then they even broke the Stylish Extension in Firefox 5 or 6.

I see examples of very good projects which somehow veer off course and end up in the ditches. And I also see a few good projects which are well managed and produce reliable upgrades. Firefox, unfortunately, is not one of those well managed Open Source projects.

[WildcatRay]

Good news. Now, as one of the Comments there says, if only Mozilla would stop breaking the add-ons with each full-version upgrade.

My point in including that comment is, hiding the version number was only a symptom of a much larger issue at Mozilla Development. They lack centralized and strong leadership, and so everyone seems to go off in multiple directions without much coordination. This is exactly the kind of disorganization which plagues much of Open Source program development. The inability to get a working Java Console, Java QuickStarter, and inability to produce a rational way for Java updates to remove Mozilla plug-ins, are all part of this lack of coordinated development in Firefox. The sudden abandonment of traditional Themes in favor of Personas in Firefox 4 and the abandonment of the UserChrome folder is yet another example of poorly coordinated development. Then they even broke the Stylish Extension in Firefox 5 or 6.

I see examples of very good projects which somehow veer off course and end up in the ditches. And I also see a few good projects which are well managed and produce reliable upgrades. Firefox, unfortunately, is not one of those well managed Open Source projects.

The latest Stylish version works fine for me in the current version of Firefox (and development versions, too).

For a way to not have each version of Firefox disable your addons, install Addon Compatibility Reporter. Not only does it disable addon compatibility checking, it has a reporting feature which helps both the folks at addons.mozilla.org and addon authors know if their addons work with the version of the browser you are using, and you can also report what problems you may be having with a particular addon, too.

[mart44]

Has anyone noticed how little Java (not JavaScript) is used on the Internet these days? I've been browsing with it disabled in the browser for a good while now and haven't noticed the lack of it. I don't mean the Java Console that I've always disabled anyway but more the entire plugin.

[bobprimak]

Has anyone noticed how little Java (not JavaScript) is used on the Internet these days? I've been browsing with it disabled in the browser for a good while now and haven't noticed the lack of it. I don't mean the Java Console that I've always disabled anyway but more the entire plugin.

Firefox hasn't been compatible with Java since Version 4. What folks get confused about is that javascript looks like it ought to have something to do with Java. But the two are totally unrelated. The originators of javascript were simply trying to make a name for themselves, and Java, Sun and Oracle have never been happy about the resulting user confusion. But apparently, there was no trademark infringement, so the confusion persists.

[bobprimak]

The latest Stylish version works fine for me in the current version of Firefox (and development versions, too).

For a way to not have each version of Firefox disable your addons, install Addon Compatibility Reporter. Not only does it disable addon compatibility checking, it has a reporting feature which helps both the folks at addons.mozilla.org and addon authors know if their addons work with the version of the browser you are using, and you can also report what problems you may be having with a particular addon, too.

I don't do much of my own customizing of Firefox, so I only notice when an existing add-on breaks. It's nice to know that there's a way to report these incidents, but I stand by my words that the very existence of such breakage, and the frequency with which it occurs, speaks volumes about the lack of coordination of Firefox development.

[mart44]

Firefox hasn't been compatible with Java since Version 4

I have Firefox 6 installed and find that Java applets will run in it.

[ldb]

I don't do much of my own customizing of Firefox, so I only notice when an existing add-on breaks. It's nice to know that there's a way to report these incidents, but I stand by my words that the very existence of such breakage, and the frequency with which it occurs, speaks volumes about the lack of coordination of Firefox development.

Is it Firefox's' job to make sure that all the hundreds of addons and plugins made by outside sources remain compatible with the browser? Or is it their job to provide a fast and secure browser that competes with all the other browsers?

[WildcatRay]

There appears to be a lack of understanding about addons. Let’s see if I can clear things up for everyone.

First, most addons are authored/written by people and companies other than Mozilla. What Mozilla has done is written all it’s programs to be extensible. Anyone can create an extension or theme to add features to or customize the appearance of Firefox, Thunderbird, Sunbird, Seamonkey, etc. (With this thread focusing primarily on Firefox, I will limit my references to it.)

As a part of that extensibility, Mozilla has defined certain parameters that addon authors need to follow. The specific one at issue in this thread is that addon authors must define the range of Firefox versions over which their addon will be “compatible.” The typical meaning of this is the range of versions that the author has tested their addon on.

Inside both Firefox and addons.mozilla.org, there are compatibility check routines that will disable and/or prevent the installation of incompatible addons. This is what is happening at the moment when Firefox releases a new version such as going from 4 to 5 and now 6. If the user has an addon that is not (yet) officially compatible with the version of Firefox in use, it will be disabled unless Firefox finds a newer, compatible version of the addon available from addons.mozilla.org. This compatibility checking routine protects the unsuspecting user from running Firefox with addons that may, in fact, be functionally incompatible with the browser.

So, the truth is this. Most addons are not “breaking” because of the release of the new version of Firefox. They are being disabled because the addon compatibility checking routine only knows that the addon is not considered “compatible.” However, for most addons, they are not functionally incompatible as the addon still works as the author intended despite whatever changes are introduced in the new version of Firefox.

This is where the Addon Compatiblity Reporter (ACR) addon that I mentioned in a previous post comes in handy. By installing this addon, the user will disable Firefox’s internal addon compatibility checking routine and allow the user to keep enabled addons that are not (yet) officially compatible with the version of Firefox they are using.

ACR, as noted by “Reporter” in it’s name, also has a reporting feature where users can report to addons.mozilla.org and the addon author whether or not their addon still works with the version of Firefox they are running. This activity can be quite beneficial as the typical addon author is only volunteering their free time to developing their addons.

ACR also will allow a user to install what may be an officially incompatible addon when visiting addons.mozilla.org. Without ACR, users won’t be able find a link to install officially incompatible addons.

With the new rapid release plan for Firefox that Mozilla has instituted, ACR may very well be the most important addon to have installed. With ACR, users won’t be left without the use of their addons just because Firefox updates to a new version.

Finally, addons.mozilla.org does provide compatibility updates to addons that are determined to be functionally compatible with version of Firefox the user is running.

To conclude, most addons are not “breaking” because of Firefox releasing new versions. They are being disabled because they are not (yet) officially compatible with the new version. Users can install ACR to allow them to keep “incompatible” addons enabled, test those addons and report back if those addons are truly compatible or not. ACR will also allow users to install officially incompatible addons from addons.mozilla.org