Re: no more native code extensions?

[Xan Lopez <xan gnome org>]

Hi Adam,

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Adam Dingle <adam yorba org> wrote:
> I have mixed feelings about this.  I understand the concerns about security,
> and writing native code that touches data that arrives from a network always
> requires caution.  But I also think that one of the strengths of GNOME is
> the promise that I can use the same languages (e.g. Vala, Python) and
> libraries (e.g. glib) to write extensions for all core applications (Totem,
> Nautilus, Epiphany and so on).  I had been looking forward to a libpeas
> extension system in Epiphany so that I could write a couple of extensions in
> Vala.  I'm much less enthusiastic about writing extensions in Javascript,
> personally.

As you say, our current extension model is problematic for a web
browser. It's not a coincidence all the other major browsers are
moving away from their old systems when they were similar to ours.

As for being able to write extensions for all core apps using the same
languages: yes, that sounds good in paper, but I think calling it a
"promise" is going a bit too far We have never supported it, and
there's never been a GNOME-wide policy about doing this for all core
apps. Even if someone proposed it, I think we could still make a good
defence of why it does not make that much sense for the browser to
follow that path.

>
> Here are some of the extensions I wanted to write:
>
> - A bookmark toolbar to replace the functionality which disappeared last
> December (see
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/epiphany-list/2012-January/msg00005.html).
> I was hoping to insert a GTK toolbar at the top of the browser window.

Adding simple UI elements to the browser UI would not be out of the
question with a new extension system IMHO. Chrome supports this,
AFAIK. We just need to be careful about the API we offer.

>
> - A form filler which would remember information about me (e.g. full name,
> address) and use it to automatically fill out forms on the Web.  The user
> would be able to enter this information in a dialog which I was hoping to
> construct using Glade and possibly attach to the Epiphany Preferences
> window.

This also sounds doable in principle, save for the Glade bit I guess.

>
> Will it be possible to write these two extensions using the new extension
> model you plan?  If so, will I have to code my user information dialog in
> HTML rather than Glade/GTK?  I'm not really enthusiastic about that, but I
> suppose I'd rather code it in HTML than not be able to implement it at all.

It's hard to make promises at this point, but in principle nothing of
what you want to do seems impossible in an hypothetical revamped
extension system. At this point what we need is for someone to sit
down, study the other solutions out there, and figure what makes more
sense for us in terms of compatibility with other browsers, platform
APIs exposed, etc. Now is the time to make a difference here, so all
help is welcome :)

Xan