Confirmed users
764
edits
Firefox/Projects/Jetpack: Difference between revisions
→Background
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Jetpack's architecture under versions 0.8 and earlier (now called the Jetpack "prototype") is being abandoned for a new architecture nicknamed the Jetpack "reboot". Check the [[Labs/Jetpack/Reboot|Labs reboot wiki page]] for details, but briefly, the differences between the two: | Jetpack's architecture under versions 0.8 and earlier (now called the Jetpack "prototype") is being abandoned for a new architecture nicknamed the Jetpack "reboot". Check the [[Labs/Jetpack/Reboot|Labs reboot wiki page]] for details, but briefly, the differences between the two: | ||
* Extensions produced under the reboot are actually XPIs. Under the prototype they were single JS files. | * Extensions produced under the reboot are actually XPIs. Under the prototype they were single JS files. | ||
* The reboot is very loosely integrated with Firefox. The Jetpack runtime is bundled in each XPI. The only significant hook that these XPIs require is a no-restart-needed mechanism. | * The reboot is very loosely integrated with Firefox. The Jetpack runtime is bundled in each XPI. The only significant hook that these XPIs require is a no-restart-needed mechanism. | ||
* The reboot has a security model, the prototype didn't. | |||
* There are two layers of APIs under the reboot. "Cuddlefish" is low-level, chrome-privileged, and wraps the platform. "Jetpack" is high-level, secure, builds on Cuddlefish, low surface area, and friendly. It's possible to use Cuddlefish without using Jetpack. | * There are two layers of APIs under the reboot. "Cuddlefish" is low-level, chrome-privileged, and wraps the platform. "Jetpack" is high-level, secure, builds on Cuddlefish, low surface area, and friendly. It's possible to use Cuddlefish without using Jetpack. | ||