Who said GUADEC Ephy-extensions party?
On 3/20/07, Adam Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > epiphany-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/epiphany-list > _______________________________________________ epiphany-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/epiphany-list
