maildev@lists.thunderbird.net

Thunderbird email developers

View all threads

Self-experiment: Convert ThunderHTMLedit from legacy XUL to legacy restartless

JK
Jörg Knobloch
Tue, Oct 29, 2019 10:28 AM

Hi,

as we all know, legacy XUL add-ons will soon not be supported any more
and those who wish to convert their add-on to a WE Experiment need to
make it restartless first.

So I did just that for ThunderHTMLedit and I enclose the resulting
bootstrap.js file.

Using ExtensionSupport.registerWindowListener() and
MozXULElement.parseXULToFragment() has made this conversion rather easy,
and hadn't the add-on been such a forked mess, the entire process would
have been easy, but I needed to straighten out the initialisation path
to adjust the scripts previously run via the XUL <script> tag.

The add-on is not on Github, but you can get a version from ATN and
inspect it.

Jörg.

Hi, as we all know, legacy XUL add-ons will soon not be supported any more and those who wish to convert their add-on to a WE Experiment need to make it restartless first. So I did just that for ThunderHTMLedit and I enclose the resulting bootstrap.js file. Using ExtensionSupport.registerWindowListener() and MozXULElement.parseXULToFragment() has made this conversion rather easy, and hadn't the add-on been such a forked mess, the entire process would have been easy, but I needed to straighten out the initialisation path to adjust the scripts previously run via the XUL <script> tag. The add-on is not on Github, but you can get a version from ATN and inspect it. Jörg.
JB
John Bieling
Tue, Nov 5, 2019 2:36 PM

Hi Jörg,

would you suggest to use your approach as a "standard suggestion" for
XUL based addons? I would then add this to the update guide on
developer.thunderbird.net.

Thanks for your time and your help,
John

Am 29.10.2019 um 11:28 schrieb Jörg Knobloch:

Hi,

as we all know, legacy XUL add-ons will soon not be supported any more
and those who wish to convert their add-on to a WE Experiment need to
make it restartless first.

So I did just that for ThunderHTMLedit and I enclose the resulting
bootstrap.js file.

Using ExtensionSupport.registerWindowListener() and
MozXULElement.parseXULToFragment() has made this conversion rather
easy, and hadn't the add-on been such a forked mess, the entire
process would have been easy, but I needed to straighten out the
initialisation path to adjust the scripts previously run via the XUL

<script> tag. The add-on is not on Github, but you can get a version from ATN and inspect it. Jörg. _______________________________________________ Maildev mailing list Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net
Hi Jörg, would you suggest to use your approach as a "standard suggestion" for XUL based addons? I would then add this to the update guide on developer.thunderbird.net. Thanks for your time and your help, John Am 29.10.2019 um 11:28 schrieb Jörg Knobloch: > Hi, > > as we all know, legacy XUL add-ons will soon not be supported any more > and those who wish to convert their add-on to a WE Experiment need to > make it restartless first. > > So I did just that for ThunderHTMLedit and I enclose the resulting > bootstrap.js file. > > Using ExtensionSupport.registerWindowListener() and > MozXULElement.parseXULToFragment() has made this conversion rather > easy, and hadn't the add-on been such a forked mess, the entire > process would have been easy, but I needed to straighten out the > initialisation path to adjust the scripts previously run via the XUL > <script> tag. > > The add-on is not on Github, but you can get a version from ATN and > inspect it. > > Jörg. > > > _______________________________________________ > Maildev mailing list > Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net > http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net
JK
Jörg Knobloch
Wed, Nov 6, 2019 2:07 PM

On 05/11/2019 15:36, John Bieling wrote:

would you suggest to use your approach as a "standard suggestion" for
XUL based addons? I would then add this to the update guide on
developer.thunderbird.net.

Yes, could be good for the ones that only overlay one or very few XUL
elements.

On 05/11/2019 15:36, John Bieling wrote: > would you suggest to use your approach as a "standard suggestion" for > XUL based addons? I would then add this to the update guide on > developer.thunderbird.net. Yes, could be good for the ones that only overlay one or very few XUL elements.