pipboy96
pipboy96
@Saiv46 I had the same idea.
@cschanaj It sounds like they are trying to justify the choice they made with arguments other than the ones that made them make the choice. They are trying to "sell"...
The way it's formulated it seems some degree of rewriting will be necessary for extension to stay compatible even if Firefox will decide to keep `webRequestBlocking` permission (due to replacement...
@zoracon ~~Can EFF (and possibly Tor Project) officially contact Mozilla, explaining them why `webRequestBlocking` should be kept? I'm sure they will listen.~~ EFF already made such contact.
Removed `chrome` and `firefox` labels since they are the only browsers we support anyway.
@zoracon Current Canary can still load Manifest V2 extensions it seems.
Nice one! I also noticed EASE can fix mixed content issues. Can we also do the opposite and allow some rulesets to attempt such fix even if user does not...
I think we can also bypass MCB even if further redirects are required by using `upgrade-insecure-requests` and then doing https => https redirect.
@zoracon What's your opinion?
@Giltyhub Can you explain what pressing Esc is supposed to do?