Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Suggestion - Why not basing Waterfox Classic on UXP? #201

Open
Sa-Ja-Di opened this issue Aug 5, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Suggestion - Why not basing Waterfox Classic on UXP? #201

Sa-Ja-Di opened this issue Aug 5, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@Sa-Ja-Di
Copy link

Sa-Ja-Di commented Aug 5, 2023

Waterfox Classic is a dead-end - that should everyone see already.

But why not re-branding UXP based browsers as Waterfox Classic? The Pale Moon/UXP code is much more capable of viewing modern web pages than the old classic Firefox 56 engine, and old add-ons still are supported there too.

Additionally, it provides an ongoing strong effort now to implement missing ECMAScrip features. For example, right now work is happening to make BigInt possible in Pale Moon.

Therefor i highly suggest in breathing new life in Waterfox Classic and restarting it with using UXP as base code.

Win-Win situation for everyone!
@tordenflesk
Copy link

You'll lose WebExtensions, no?

@michael-j-oconnor
Copy link

You'll lose WebExtensions, no?

Basilisk doesn't have then, so guessing not.

@hawkeye116477
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, you'll lose WebExtensions and also I don't know what the point of that would be, there is already browser with similar UI called Basilisk.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@tordenflesk @hawkeye116477 @Sa-Ja-Di @michael-j-oconnor