Easier Enabling of Extensions

[Krutonium]

I ask because I have several addons that I would need to be able to truly move to this browser - LastPass for example for many people, would be a dealbreaker.

[diracdeltas]

Compatibility with Chrome extensions is a good post-1.0 goal. The main reason it's not coming earlier is that Electron doesn't want to support all the Chrome extension APIs; we'd have to convince them to do so or put them in our fork of Electron. electron/electron#1498

[wrkerr]

This is a really important enhancement for me. I daily move between an Android phone, a linux home desktop, and a Windows work laptop. There are a handful of extensions that provide some important security and integration funcationality.

Like the OP, I too need integration from a cross platform password manager, though preferably not one that stores your password database on their servers like LastPass. Enpass and Keepass are primary examples, though there are others. These are particularly effective when combined with an extension like Authy, which makes two-factor authentication much simpler.

Additionally, I would love to have support for some browser integration with a secure messenger that interfaces with android messaging. Signal Private Messenger by Open Whisper Systems is developing a Chrome web app desktop interface that would be wonderful to have. Telegram and others provide similar feature sets.

Lastly, there are several services which leverage browser extensions to provide a simple way to share text, links, and files between devices. Join and Pushbullet are two popular examples, and their browser extensions provide a great deal of multi-device integration and convenience. This would be a great addition.

All of these could be achieved if Brave gained support for Chrome extensions and web apps, rather than creating another ecosystem of exensions.

[weems]

@wrkerr definitely in plans, but we have to prioritize what will be in 1.0 so as to move as fast as possible and meet schedule on time :) Might want to check https://brave.com/dev_timeline.html

[wrkerr]

@weems, that makes sense to me. Thanks!

[diracdeltas]

Talked to @bridiver about this just now. We will probably implement all/most of https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebExtensions, which will cover the majority of functionality needed for chrome extensions.

[Krutonium]

Wait, so Brave will support both Firefox AND Chrome extensions?

[bridiver]

@PFCKrutonium No, the webextensions are Mozilla's effort to support Chrome extensions, but we will not support FF only extensions

[Krutonium]

Ah okay.

[samhh]

Glad to see this is planned! +1

I'm also looking to develop an online service that needs a plug-in and I would really like 100% coverage. Chrome compatibility is a small plus because that's one less browser to support but it's more important to me at least that there is some way to target the browser.

I worry about Electron being able to support chrome extentions in a way that won't be buggy. I feel bad for them being asked to support that and seeing as that's not even on their time table, much less on their time table but unrealistic, I'm a +1 for a rudementry add-on system. Atom, which electron is coded for seemed to have no problem doing it at that layer. That's another reason why Electron won't include chrom plugins. It's not on Atom's radar so it won't be on Electon's. Could you imagine how borked Atom could get if people injected extensions in there?

They forked Electron from Atom so people to could work on it to make it more stable for Atom. They aren't going to accept features that could create pains for Atom even if by mistake.

[bridiver]

well, it's not really practical for Electron to have 100% coverage because a lot of API functionality depends on the specific app you have implemented. For instance: browser action popup windows can be triggered with generic functionality in Electron, but it's impossible to know how an app will actually want to display them. They are interested in pulling in some extension functionality and there is an open ticket for it, but I'm not sure how much of it we will be able to upstream. I'm doing my best to make the implementations as generic as possible, but there's no guarantee everything will make it to upstream. I'm also using the chromium code where possible (background pages, chrome.runtime and a few others).

[bridiver]

also, it's entirely up to the app whether or not they want to expose the ability to install extensions. I even left in checks that allow you to build electron with extensions disabled. So far we have not exposed the ability to install user extensions because the extension support is limited and we haven't implemented all the permission checks necessary to ensure the safety of unknown extensions

[nickschurch]

I'll add my voice to the need for some browser apps - keepass/lastpass is a must for me.