Add-on Compatibility for Firefox 11

10

Firefox 11 was pushed to the Aurora channel weeks ago, and Firefox 12 will follow suit very soon. So, it’s time for the long overdue overview of bugs that can affect add-on compatibility in Firefox 11. I’m sorry this update is being posted so late, but things have been pretty crazy lately. More on that in the Firefox 10 section.

A few notes regarding Firefox 10

If everything goes according to plan, Firefox 10 will be pushed to the public in less than a week. There are a couple of points that are worth mentioning:

  • Starting with Firefox 10, add-ons will default to compatible. All add-on versions that have compatibility up to Firefox 4 or higher will automatically work in Firefox 10 and all future releases. This excludes add-ons that are not extensions (themes, dictionaries, language packs) and add-ons with binary components. We will also keep an override list that we will fill with all add-on versions that are known to break due to compatibility problems. This is what has kept me busy for the past weeks. We need your help to keep the override list up to date.
  • Rename omni.jar to omni.ja. If your add-on references omni.jar directly, it will break now that it has been renamed. We recommend that you find more flexible ways to reference these files, since most should be accessible through chrome URLs.

For more information about Firefox 10 compatibility, please read the full compatibility update.

Firefox 11

Other important changes are noted in Firefox 11 for developers.

New stuff in 11!

Please let me know in the comments if there’s anything missing or incorrect on these lists. If your add-on breaks on Firefox 10 or 11, I’d like to know.

Because of the Default to Compatible feature, we are no longer doing compatibility bumps like we did before. We will still run the validation but only send you a message if your add-on is identified as incompatible. There will be no more automatic version upgrades, given that there’s no point anymore.

Tags: , , , ,

Categories: compatibility, developers, documentation

10 responses {+}

  1. Kohei Yoshino

    I just posted the Japanese translation:
    https://dev.mozilla.jp/2012/01/compatibility-for-firefox-11/

      ·   Reply

    1. Jorge Villalobos Author

      <3

        ·   Reply

  2. Mark Banner

    I’ve just done a test – the Canadian Dictionary is not marked as incompatible in TB 10, despite the fact that it says max version 10.0a1 on the AMO website.

      ·   Reply

    1. Jorge Villalobos Author

      I could be wrong about dictionaries. They should work fine across versions, unlike language packs or themes, that always require significant work to update.

        ·   Reply

  3. Mingyi Liu

    Default to compatible is great! One of my Jetpack addons was mysteriously marked as incompatible with FF9 despite that I marked it as compatible up to 10 and it was tested & working in 9 and 10beta. This did not happen to other Jetpack or non-Jetpack addons of mine and dumbfounded me. Users were emailing me about it too and I had to post a special note on addon page. Now hopefully I don’t need to worry about this issue any more!

      ·   Reply

  4. suryaden

    translating into bahasa Indonesia on my blog
    http://suryaden.com/browser/firefox-11-kompatibilitas

      ·   Reply

  5. MarkD

    Instead of releasing a new firefox every few hours, why don’t you just focus on making the current one fast, efficient, reliable and compatible? Not everyone wants to update their web browser every week.

    Just a thought.

      ·   Reply

  6. Mats Svensson

    So you STILL cant sidegrade from 3.5 if you have addons you need that 4.0+ broke?

    JFC!

      ·   Reply

    1. Jorge Villalobos Author

      Add-ons that weren’t upgraded to 4 are very unlikely to work on current versions of Firefox.

      Which add-ons do you need that are not compatible with 4?

        ·   Reply

  7. Victor Kimuar

    Hi,

    I’m wondering if there is a nofollow addon for firefox 10. Or where is the page where I find only firefox 10 addons?

    Thanks,
    Victor

      ·   Reply

Post Your Comment