Add in management addon WIP #485
Conversation
| "manifest_version": 2, | ||
| "name": "__MSG_extensionName__", | ||
| "default_locale": "en_US", | ||
| "version": "0.1", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be "0.6" to be in sync w/ src/manifest.json?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd rather not get into that maintenance battle or require a build script if we can help it. This isn't planned to be published on AMO.
| }, | ||
|
|
||
| async getStorageKey(key) { | ||
| let data = await browser.storage.local.get([key]); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can't without it being a pain. StorageUtils is a module rather than a global like utils is.
jonathanKingston
force-pushed
the
management-addon
branch
from
3bfebc3
to
062e184
Compare
jonathanKingston
force-pushed
the
management-addon
branch
from
062e184
to
00132d5
Compare
| "manifest_version": 2, | ||
| "name": "__MSG_extensionName__", | ||
| "default_locale": "en_US", | ||
| "version": "0.1", |
jonathanKingston
force-pushed
the
management-addon
branch
from
00132d5
to
0b9ed06
Compare
|
How do I use this add-on? cd management-src
npx web-ext build
# Building web extension from /Users/pdehaan/dev/github/mozilla/secure-proxy/management-src
# Your web extension is ready: /Users/pdehaan/dev/github/mozilla/secure-proxy/management-src/web-ext-artifacts/firefox_private_network_-_management_interface-0.1.zipNext, I go back into the main add-on directory and type the following to spawn secure-proxy add-on in Nightly w/ a fresh profile. npx web-ext runNow I go to about:debugging and load the ./management-src/web-ext-artifacts/firefox_private_network_-_management_interface.0.1.zip as a temporary add-on, but I still seem to get errors after logging in to FxA.
|
|
Yeah, we need to write a bit of documentation.
I'll write the correct steps on a README.md. |
@bakulf the management addon is just a shell at the moment. Let me know if you are happy with how I'm changing config and if there is any config we should be adding.
This doesn't resolve changing these prefs after the fact so the user might need to restart secure proxy but that doesn't seem a huge issue right now with the added increase in complexity it would add.