mozilla

Revision 111965 of Setting up extension development environment

  • Revision slug: Talk:Setting_up_extension_development_environment
  • Revision title: Setting up extension development environment
  • Revision id: 111965
  • Created:
  • Creator: gekacheka
  • Is current revision? No
  • Comment Is LeakMonitor appropriate here?; 31 words added

Revision Content

The migrated version removed much of the text in the original, some of which was actually useful. Need to revise it. --Nickolay 09:41, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

Such as? The only major thing not included was "Using an unpacked version of Thunderbird/Firefox for development" which says won't work in 1.5+. I also didn't understand why anyone would do such a thing.--Np 10:09, 24 May 2007 (PDT)
Such as:
  • the link to http://kb.mozillazine.org/Editing_configuration (a surprising number of beginner developers don't know what to do with the prefs listed)
  • the bold text near "javascript.options.showInConsole" (otherwise people ignore it, even after having been pointed to the page)
  • the detailed description of the XUL cache and the related tradeoffs (deleted from which was linked from this page), a bunch of text and links from the "Development extensions" section,
  • the link to
  • a bunch of other markup
  • any information on previous versions (while I agree it shouldn't be on the page with current tips to avoid overwhelming a new developer, it is useful to some people, so there ought to be a link to an old revision of some page.. or something).
The reason people might want to unpack the Firefox's JARs is that it's easier to directly edit the source code instead of hacking overlays and such when you're doing research work, debugging, or just playing around. And not everyone has figured how to create their own build. I agree it might be better if that information was on a separate page (that's why I put it into a separate section, titled "Non-essential setup tips" when it was contributed). --Nickolay 06:42, 4 June 2007 (PDT)
I think you're being too picky. Only one of your points if something of substance that you feel should be on this page, the rest are just formatting and links. I think the current article is an improvement over its previous state, even if all your points are valid.--Np 08:00, 4 June 2007 (PDT)
I am being picky, yes. I just don't see why you needed to remove stuff where it did not make the page harder to read. Your version is indeed an improvement over the kb.mozillazine version, but it wouldn't be worse if you kept some of the stuff you deleted.
I didn't say thanks for moving the page - thank you. Nitpicking on others' work is something I'm guilty of, don't take it personally :) --Nickolay 14:56, 4 June 2007 (PDT)
The thing I intentionally didn't include was the JAR thing because I didn't understand it. Personally, I wouldn't include it because it's not something I would do, but I wouldn't object to it being there.
I'm not sure what the policy of the MDC is in relation to documentation on older versions of products. In the KB, we basically remove info that relates to a product that's no longer supported by Mozilla to keep things simple.--Np 18:58, 4 June 2007 (PDT)

Changed Development profile section to be first because users create development profile first and then change preferences or install development extensions --CrazyEyE 11:17, 11 June 2008 (PDT)

Is LeakMonitor appropriate here?  At one time there was a push to get extension authors to use it to help keep extensions from bloating memory and degrading Firefox performance. 

Revision Source

<p>The migrated version removed much of the text in <a class="external" href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/index.php?title=Setting_up_extension_development_environment&amp;oldid=30405">the original</a>, some of which was actually useful. Need to revise it. --<a href="/User:Nickolay" title="User:Nickolay">Nickolay</a> 09:41, 24 May 2007 (PDT)</p>
<dl> <dd>Such as? The only major thing not included was "Using an unpacked version of Thunderbird/Firefox for development" which says won't work in 1.5+. I also didn't understand why anyone would do such a thing.--<a href="/User:Np" title="User:Np">Np</a> 10:09, 24 May 2007 (PDT) <dl> <dd> Such as: <ul> <li>the link to <a class=" external" href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/Editing_configuration" rel="freelink">http://kb.mozillazine.org/Editing_configuration</a> (a surprising number of beginner developers don't know what to do with the prefs listed)</li> <li>the bold text near "javascript.options.showInConsole" (otherwise people ignore it, even after having been pointed to the page)</li> <li>the detailed description of the XUL cache and the related tradeoffs (deleted from <a class="external" href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/index.php?title=Dev_:_Tips_:_Disable_XUL_cache&amp;oldid=20002"></a> which was linked from this page), a bunch of text and links from the "Development extensions" section,</li> <li>the link to <a class="external" href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/Getting_started_with_extension_development"></a></li> <li>a bunch of other markup</li> <li>any information on previous versions (while I agree it shouldn't be on the page with current tips to avoid overwhelming a new developer, it is useful to some people, so there ought to be a link to an old revision of some page.. or something).</li> </ul> </dd> <dd> The reason people might want to unpack the Firefox's JARs is that it's easier to directly edit the source code instead of hacking overlays and such when you're doing research work, debugging, or just playing around. And not everyone has figured how to create their own build. I agree it might be better if that information was on a separate page (that's why I put it into a separate section, titled "Non-essential setup tips" when it was contributed). --<a href="/User:Nickolay" title="User:Nickolay">Nickolay</a> 06:42, 4 June 2007 (PDT) <dl> <dd>I think you're being too picky. Only one of your points if something of substance that you feel should be on this page, the rest are just formatting and links. I think the current article is an improvement over its previous state, even if all your points are valid.--<a href="/User:Np" title="User:Np">Np</a> 08:00, 4 June 2007 (PDT) <dl> <dd>I am being picky, yes. I just don't see why you needed to remove stuff where it did not make the page harder to read. Your version is indeed an improvement over the kb.mozillazine version, but it wouldn't be worse if you kept some of the stuff you deleted. </dd> <dd>I didn't say thanks for moving the page - thank you. Nitpicking on others' work is something I'm guilty of, don't take it personally :) --<a href="/User:Nickolay" title="User:Nickolay">Nickolay</a> 14:56, 4 June 2007 (PDT) <dl> <dd>The thing I intentionally didn't include was the JAR thing because I didn't understand it. Personally, I wouldn't include it because it's not something I would do, but I wouldn't object to it being there. </dd> <dd>I'm not sure what the policy of the MDC is in relation to documentation on older versions of products. In the KB, we basically remove info that relates to a product that's no longer supported by Mozilla to keep things simple.--<a href="/User:Np" title="User:Np">Np</a> 18:58, 4 June 2007 (PDT) </dd> </dl> </dd> </dl> </dd> </dl> </dd> </dl> </dd>
</dl>
<p>Changed <a href="/en/Setting_up_extension_development_environment#Development_profile" title="en/Setting_up_extension_development_environment#Development_profile">Development profile</a> section to be first because users create development profile first and then change preferences or install development extensions --<a href="/User:CrazyEyE" title="User:CrazyEyE">CrazyEyE</a> 11:17, 11 June 2008 (PDT)</p>
<p>Is <a class="link-https" href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2490" title="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2490">LeakMonitor</a> appropriate here?  At one time there was a push to get extension authors to use it to help keep extensions from bloating memory and degrading Firefox performance.  </p>
Revert to this revision