Closed Bug 935108 (nodemodules) Opened 11 years ago Closed 7 years ago

[tracking] Node Module Parity

Categories

(Add-on SDK Graveyard :: General, defect, P4)

x86
macOS
defect

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

People

(Reporter: jsantell, Unassigned)

References

Details

No description provided.
Depends on: 935106
Depends on: 919059
Depends on: 935112
Depends on: 935113
Depends on: 900288
Depends on: 935114
Depends on: 935115
Depends on: 935119
Depends on: 935120
Depends on: 935121
Depends on: 935122
Depends on: 935123
Depends on: 935124
Depends on: 935126
Depends on: 935127
Depends on: 935215
Depends on: 935221
Depends on: 935223
Depends on: 957352
The browserify project [1] has reimplemented a good share of Node APIs over browser (content) APIs [2]. It's mostly MIT-licenced (some code is borrowed from elsewhere and is BSD IIUC). I'm unclear on the level of compatibility Might help a lot with this bug to just import what has been for browserify and/or contribute to this project for the Jetpack/Node compatibility layer. [1] https://github.com/substack/node-browserify [2] https://github.com/substack/browserify-handbook#builtins
This is mainly held up on whether we should land these into the SDK proper, or have a third-party collection of modules fulfilling these node needs, unfortunately
(In reply to Jordan Santell [:jsantell] [@jsantell] from comment #2) > This is mainly held up on whether we should land these into the SDK proper, > or have a third-party collection of modules fulfilling these node needs, > unfortunately "unfortunately" refers to the decision not holding the bug up? Where is this discussed? Maybe maintain a third-party collection right now and re-evaluate if there is value to land this in SDK proper or whether people can live with npm-hosted shims? As long as the modules remain on npm, addons won't break. The other way around (ship in SDK then remove it later) is pretty much and impossible route.
Summary: Node Module Parity [meta] → [tracking] Node Module Parity
Assignee: jsantell → nobody
Depends on: 1226540
(In reply to Jordan Santell [:jsantell] [@jsantell] (Please needinfo) from comment #2) > This is mainly held up on whether we should land these into the SDK proper, > or have a third-party collection of modules fulfilling these node needs, > unfortunately This has to be done is sdk proper now, if it is going to get done at all, due to the changes that kev needham has forced on the community https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/08/21/the-future-of-developing-firefox-add-ons/ (ie removing `require('chrome')`).
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → INCOMPLETE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.