Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Sailfish-4
REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/

[excerpt quote=\"
That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their own.
\" /]

Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for non-core
technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical resources why not
extend that to core technologies and just internally relabel them
"non-core" :-)

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

WaltS48-3
On 10/01/2016 02:56 PM, Sailfish wrote:

> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
> saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their own.
> \" /]
>
> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for non-core
> technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical resources why not
> extend that to core technologies and just internally relabel them
> "non-core" :-)
>


That is about Project Mortar, or as I call it, the turn WaltS48 into a
member of the Firefox is becoming a Chrome clone faction. 😞

<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mortar_Project>

Work done behind closed doors.

> The exploratory work we've done so far was done in a private repository for various reasons. We are unable to make that repository public yet, but we're working on creating a new public repository to track this work going forward. We will also file public tracking bugs for the remaining work. Stay tuned !

Will we have Chrome clone, Nightly, Aurora, Beta and Release repositories?

--
Visit Pittsburgh <http://www.visitpittsburgh.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Delrio
On 01-Oct-2016 4:58 PM, WaltS48 wrote:

> On 10/01/2016 02:56 PM, Sailfish wrote:
>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
>> saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their own.
>> \" /]
>>
>> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for
>> non-core technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical
>> resources why not extend that to core technologies and just internally
>> relabel them "non-core" :-)
>>
>
>
> That is about Project Mortar, or as I call it, the turn WaltS48 into a
> member of the Firefox is becoming a Chrome clone faction. 😞
>
> <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mortar_Project>
>
> Work done behind closed doors.
>
>> The exploratory work we've done so far was done in a private
>> repository for various reasons. We are unable to make that repository
>> public yet, but we're working on creating a new public repository to
>> track this work going forward. We will also file public tracking bugs
>> for the remaining work. Stay tuned !
>
> Will we have Chrome clone, Nightly, Aurora, Beta and Release repositories?
>

:-) Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Mark Blain-2
In reply to this post by Sailfish-4
Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote in
news:[hidden email]:

> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash
> player, saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and
> maintain their own. \" /]
>
> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for
> non-core technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical
> resources why not extend that to core technologies and just
> internally relabel them "non-core" :-)
>

In some respects thats a shame:  Firefox's PDF.JS and Chrome's PDFium
are very different approaches, and it's good to have alternatives.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what Mark Blain graced us with on
10/1/2016 4:23 PM:

> Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote in
> news:[hidden email]:
>
>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash
>> player, saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and
>> maintain their own. \" /]
>>
>> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for
>> non-core technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical
>> resources why not extend that to core technologies and just
>> internally relabel them "non-core" :-)
>
> In some respects thats a shame:  Firefox's PDF.JS and Chrome's PDFium
> are very different approaches, and it's good to have alternatives.

Yes, it's especially hard to give up on a technology implementation that
  they've spent a lot of resource on, I'd imagine. The biggest reason I
set Chrome as my default PDF reader is that, at the time I made the
decision, Fx's PDF viewer didn't support PDF form entry and Chrome did.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Sailfish-4
In reply to this post by WaltS48-3
My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on 10/1/2016
1:58 PM:

> On 10/01/2016 02:56 PM, Sailfish wrote:
>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
>> saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their own.
>> \" /]
>>
>> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for
>> non-core technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical
>> resources why not extend that to core technologies and just internally
>> relabel them "non-core" :-)
>>
>
>
> That is about Project Mortar, or as I call it, the turn WaltS48 into a
> member of the Firefox is becoming a Chrome clone faction. 😞
>
> <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mortar_Project>
>
> Work done behind closed doors.
>
>> The exploratory work we've done so far was done in a private
>> repository for various reasons. We are unable to make that repository
>> public yet, but we're working on creating a new public repository to
>> track this work going forward. We will also file public tracking bugs
>> for the remaining work. Stay tuned !
>
> Will we have Chrome clone, Nightly, Aurora, Beta and Release repositories?
>
Why not, really? Once the decision was made to scrape XUL/XPCOM in favor
of Webkit APIs, it would make sense to stop reinventing the wheel when
there is an available feature out there, imo.

The slippery slope areas will be when to accept losing ground on some
existing or even new core technology vs. holding on or creating a new
wheel.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Desiree-11
In reply to this post by Sailfish-4
On 10/1/2016 1:53 PM, Sailfish wrote:

> My bloviated meandering follows what Mark Blain graced us with on
> 10/1/2016 4:23 PM:
>> Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote in
>> news:[hidden email]:
>>
>>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash
>>> player, saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and
>>> maintain their own. \" /]
>>>
>>> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for
>>> non-core technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical
>>> resources why not extend that to core technologies and just
>>> internally relabel them "non-core" :-)
>>
>> In some respects thats a shame:  Firefox's PDF.JS and Chrome's PDFium
>> are very different approaches, and it's good to have alternatives.
>
> Yes, it's especially hard to give up on a technology implementation that
>    they've spent a lot of resource on, I'd imagine. The biggest reason I
> set Chrome as my default PDF reader is that, at the time I made the
> decision, Fx's PDF viewer didn't support PDF form entry and Chrome did.
>
I love the Fx PDF viewer.  It's excellent.  That article is very
disturbing.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Ron Hunter
On 10/2/2016 8:28 AM, Desiree wrote:

> On 10/1/2016 1:53 PM, Sailfish wrote:
>> My bloviated meandering follows what Mark Blain graced us with on
>> 10/1/2016 4:23 PM:
>>> Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote in
>>> news:[hidden email]:
>>>
>>>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>>>
>>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash
>>>> player, saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and
>>>> maintain their own. \" /]
>>>>
>>>> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for
>>>> non-core technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical
>>>> resources why not extend that to core technologies and just
>>>> internally relabel them "non-core" :-)
>>>
>>> In some respects thats a shame:  Firefox's PDF.JS and Chrome's PDFium
>>> are very different approaches, and it's good to have alternatives.
>>
>> Yes, it's especially hard to give up on a technology implementation that
>>    they've spent a lot of resource on, I'd imagine. The biggest reason I
>> set Chrome as my default PDF reader is that, at the time I made the
>> decision, Fx's PDF viewer didn't support PDF form entry and Chrome did.
>>
> I love the Fx PDF viewer.  It's excellent.  That article is very
> disturbing.
I have found it unusable.  It often refuses to render .PDF files, is
terribly slow about the job, and sometimes runs my 4GB desktop out of
RAM trying to use the magnify function.  Meanwhile, the one for Chrome
works fast, and I haven't had it fail to render one yet.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

»Q«
In reply to this post by WaltS48-3
In <news:[hidden email]>,
WaltS48 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mortar_Project>
>
> Work done behind closed doors.

Because reasons!  "The exploratory work we've done so far was done in a
private repository for various reasons."  PDFium is open, and AFAIK the
PPAPI specs are open, so I wonder why they can't even say why Mozilla's
work on this isn't open.

I guess as long as Mozilla want to help Google and Adobe make sure
Flash is around forever, it makes some sense to support it as a PPAPI
plugin.  (I've been using the bundled Chrome plugin with Firefox for a
while now, but for now it requires a wrapper to make it seem to Firefox
as a NPAPI plugin, so it doesn't come with any of the security stuff
built into PPAPI natively.)

The Flash stuff isn't even mentioned in the current status or
implementations plans, and it looks like only baby steps have been
taken so far WRT PDFium.

My plan for dealing with PDFs once they removed plugin support was just
to start having them open in a separate program.  I guess I'll check
out whatever Mozilla have in place at that point first, though, whether
it's pdfjs or PDFium.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

»Q«
In <news:[hidden email]>,
»Q« <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> WaltS48 <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mortar_Project>
> >
> > Work done behind closed doors.  
>
> Because reasons!  "The exploratory work we've done so far was done in
> a private repository for various reasons."  PDFium is open, and AFAIK
> the PPAPI specs are open, so I wonder why they can't even say why
> Mozilla's work on this isn't open.

Apparently I was wrong about PPAPI -- the spec is a moving target and
is defined by what works with Blink, with no signs Google might try to
make it an open standard.  And the wikipedia says Chrome has private
APIs specific to their bundled Flash plugin.  Why Mozilla would want to
expend resources on such a thing is beyond me.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what »Q« graced us with on 10/2/2016
3:17 PM:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> »Q« <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
>> WaltS48 <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mortar_Project>
>>>
>>> Work done behind closed doors.  
>> Because reasons!  "The exploratory work we've done so far was done in
>> a private repository for various reasons."  PDFium is open, and AFAIK
>> the PPAPI specs are open, so I wonder why they can't even say why
>> Mozilla's work on this isn't open.
>
> Apparently I was wrong about PPAPI -- the spec is a moving target and
> is defined by what works with Blink, with no signs Google might try to
> make it an open standard.  And the wikipedia says Chrome has private
> APIs specific to their bundled Flash plugin.  Why Mozilla would want to
> expend resources on such a thing is beyond me.

Curiouser and curiouser...

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Terry
In reply to this post by Sailfish-4
On 10/1/2016 11:56 AM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard

> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
> saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their own.
> \" /]
>
> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for non-core
> technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical resources why not
> extend that to core technologies and just internally relabel them
> "non-core" :-)
>

If Google pays for the license on Flash Player, why would Google allow
Mozilla to use it for free?
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

»Q«
In <news:[hidden email]>,
Terry <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 10/1/2016 11:56 AM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard
>
> > REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
> >
> > [excerpt quote=\"
> > That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
> > saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their
> > own. \" /]

> If Google pays for the license on Flash Player, why would Google
> allow Mozilla to use it for free?

That's a big "if".  Why would Google pay Adobe for that?
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

WaltS48-3
On 10/03/2016 01:05 PM, »Q« wrote:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> Terry <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 10/1/2016 11:56 AM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard
>>
>>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
>>> saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their
>>> own. \" /]
>
>> If Google pays for the license on Flash Player, why would Google
>> allow Mozilla to use it for free?
>
> That's a big "if".  Why would Google pay Adobe for that?
>

Because they are modifying a NPAPI plugin to work with PPAPI?

--
Visit Pittsburgh <http://www.visitpittsburgh.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS
Go Bills, Steelers, Pitt, Pens and Sabres!
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Sailfish-4
In reply to this post by Terry
My bloviated meandering follows what Terry graced us with on 10/3/2016
9:15 AM:

> On 10/1/2016 11:56 AM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard
>
>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
>> saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their own.
>> \" /]
>>
>> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for non-core
>> technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical resources why not
>> extend that to core technologies and just internally relabel them
>> "non-core" :-)
>
> If Google pays for the license on Flash Player, why would Google allow
> Mozilla to use it for free?

As Q has already pointed out, a lot of the details on this are still
unclear. For example, "if" Google is paying the license on Flash Player,
then why couldn't Mozilla also do so? And, if they aren't then why would
Mozilla need to?

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Terry
On 10/3/2016 9:17 PM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard

> My bloviated meandering follows what Terry graced us with on 10/3/2016
> 9:15 AM:
>> On 10/1/2016 11:56 AM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard
>>
>>> REF: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/01/firefox_chrome_apis/
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> That will allow Firefox to run Chrome's PDF viewer and Flash player,
>>> saving Moz's programmers from having to develop and maintain their own.
>>> \" /]
>>>
>>> Is the assimilation beginning? At first it is claimed to be for non-core
>>> technologies but, if successful at freeing up critical resources why not
>>> extend that to core technologies and just internally relabel them
>>> "non-core" :-)
>> If Google pays for the license on Flash Player, why would Google allow
>> Mozilla to use it for free?
>
> As Q has already pointed out, a lot of the details on this are still
> unclear. For example, "if" Google is paying the license on Flash Player,
> then why couldn't Mozilla also do so? And, if they aren't then why would
> Mozilla need to?
>

At one time, Google did pay Adobe.  Google saw the disaster FF & Flash
were as two separate products. Licensing Flash and controlling how it
interacts with their browser was an excellent idea.

So if Google is still paying like I said, they have no reason to allow
Mozilla to piggy back, and Mozilla "should" pay also.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what Terry graced us with on 10/4/2016
2:48 PM:

<snip />
>
> At one time, Google did pay Adobe.  Google saw the disaster FF & Flash
> were as two separate products. Licensing Flash and controlling how it
> interacts with their browser was an excellent idea.
>
> So if Google is still paying like I said, they have no reason to allow
> Mozilla to piggy back, and Mozilla "should" pay also.

Well, if so, the question then comes as to whom should they (Mozilla)
pay, yes? Since the Chrome Pepper API is open then it would seem that
the company that would request payment would be Adobe, if at all.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Terry
On 10/4/2016 8:16 PM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard

> My bloviated meandering follows what Terry graced us with on 10/4/2016
> 2:48 PM:
>
> <snip />
>> At one time, Google did pay Adobe.  Google saw the disaster FF&  Flash
>> were as two separate products. Licensing Flash and controlling how it
>> interacts with their browser was an excellent idea.
>>
>> So if Google is still paying like I said, they have no reason to allow
>> Mozilla to piggy back, and Mozilla "should" pay also.
>
> Well, if so, the question then comes as to whom should they (Mozilla)
> pay, yes? Since the Chrome Pepper API is open then it would seem that
> the company that would request payment would be Adobe, if at all.
>

I thought Google would prevent FF from being able to run it, but maybe
they can't.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what Terry graced us with on 10/5/2016
2:59 PM:
> On 10/4/2016 8:16 PM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard
>>
>> Well, if so, the question then comes as to whom should they (Mozilla)
>> pay, yes? Since the Chrome Pepper API is open then it would seem that
>> the company that would request payment would be Adobe, if at all.
>
> I thought Google would prevent FF from being able to run it, but maybe
> they can't.

As far as using any of "their" non-open code, I would think they could
deny the use of it but as far as the Adobe code, I believe that's up to
Adobe to decide. I suppose Google could had stipulated in the marketing
agreement that their use was exclusionary; however, I seem to recall
that Microsoft also has a similar implementation with their browser.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox Google's Pepper API to run Chrome's PDF, Flash plugins

Terry
On 10/5/2016 8:48 PM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard

> My bloviated meandering follows what Terry graced us with on 10/5/2016
> 2:59 PM:
>> On 10/4/2016 8:16 PM On a whim, Sailfish pounded out on the keyboard
>>> Well, if so, the question then comes as to whom should they (Mozilla)
>>> pay, yes? Since the Chrome Pepper API is open then it would seem that
>>> the company that would request payment would be Adobe, if at all.
>> I thought Google would prevent FF from being able to run it, but maybe
>> they can't.
>
> As far as using any of "their" non-open code, I would think they could
> deny the use of it but as far as the Adobe code, I believe that's up to
> Adobe to decide. I suppose Google could had stipulated in the marketing
> agreement that their use was exclusionary; however, I seem to recall
> that Microsoft also has a similar implementation with their browser.
>

MS must also be licensing it now since they control the updating of
Flash within the OS, so I would think Mozilla would have to do the same
rather than "using" another company's license.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12