How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?

MVV_

Well, developer mode should be enabled in browser globally (it is a switch that e.g. allows installing unpacked extensions), not in an extension settings, and it has many effects.

luetage

@MVV_ Write a feature request.

barbudo2005

@MVV_

Said:

…...I want to believe that Vivaldi will not force users to enable developer mode for using extensions like Tampermonkey...

What is the problem with having enabled the developer mode?

MVV_

This post is deleted!

MVV_

@barbudo2005,
Well, this mode is intended for developing extensions, I don't know exactly all its effects but e.g. it may work slower because of debugging features.

barbudo2005

@MVV_

Said:

it may work slower because of debugging features.

With today's multi-core processors and fast memory. I doubt it very much!!!!

MVV_

@barbudo2005,
Modern Internet with lots of poorly optimized sites overloaded with JS, eats very much resources, especially with adblockers, and it is much more noticeable when a browser is used in a virtual machine. So performance itself may already be a serious issue of the developer mode. It would be good to know its other issues btw...

barbudo2005

@MVV_

Said:

So performance itself may already be a serious issue of the developer mode.

Please measure it in millionths of seconds and inform all users. We will be very grateful.

Catweazle

@MVV_ I don't have an powerfull gaming PC, but for me Vivaldi is snappy and fast, faster than the Mullvad Browser in default settings, which I also have for tests.

rseiler

There was an update on this today:

https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/manifest-v2-phase-out-begins.html

AFAIK, the Registry workaround below should inoculate us for at least a year:

An example .reg file for Vivaldi, Chrome, etc (adapt as needed):

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\BraveSoftware\Brave]
"ExtensionManifestV2Availability"=dword:00000002

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Google\Chrome]
"ExtensionManifestV2Availability"=dword:00000002

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Edge]
"ExtensionManifestV2Availability"=dword:00000002

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Vivaldi]
"ExtensionManifestV2Availability"=dword:00000002

RasheedHolland

@rseiler said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

There was an update on this today:

https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/manifest-v2-phase-out-begins.html

AFAIK, the Registry workaround below should inoculate us for at least a year.

I just read about it, but Vivaldi could block this right? I mean old extensions should be able to work, even if Google removes them from the Web Store, no? And what does the registry workaround exactly do?

rseiler

@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

I just read about it, but Vivaldi could block this right? I mean old extensions should be able to work, even if Google removes them from the Web Store, no? And what does the registry workaround exactly do?

Yes, Vivaldi might.

But if not, that's what "ExtensionManifestV2Availability" is about. It's Google's so-called Enterprise Policy designed for those who wish to delay what's happening until June 2025.

Hadden89

@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

Vivaldi could block this right?

Until the policy exists. But it requires user intervention (see below why). So we should have an year of grace.

I mean old extensions should be able to work, even if Google removes them from the Web Store, no?

Yes and no. A lot of extensions which requires V2 APIs will be likely not be developed anymore - because as long the chromium development proceed - they will continue to phase out the part of the chromium which make work the legacy API (V2). In the long term, they will just stop to work to function on newer releases.

Also, they will test the new chromium around the V3 API, so anything you still use with V2 is partially supported or not supported at all from a dev point of view.

And what does the registry workaround exactly do?

It simply tells to chromium extensions page to ignore the fact the user is using addons with manifest V2 , allowing to use it for the intended period of time. It should also allow to install them from the store, likely for six month or less.

Catweazle

@Hadden89,a lthough the "grace time" with this Registry entry is appreciated, it is only temporary and I prefer to use recent scripts instead of the Chrome Store extensions, which also offer many more possibilities and not be "decaffeinated" by Google. Similar as with the privacy apps from Google Play instead of those from F-Droid.

n any case, Google is going to eliminate many extensions for privacy or security, as it has done with others before for "violating its policy", extensions that nevertheless continue to exist for Mozilla. uBO of the Chrome store is surely only going to be a shadow of what it was before.

I only hope that Google doesn't start getting its hands on Greasy-o Violentmonkey too.

But where there is a law, there is also a cheat

barbudo2005

@Catweazle
Said:

I only hope that Google doesn't start getting its hands on Greasy-o Violentmonkey too.

Tampermonkey recent changes:

Catweazle

@barbudo2005, Tampermonkey is nice, but it's proprietary soft, Violent- and Greasymonkey are FOSS.
I know that they are not really needed in Vivaldi, because I can istall the scripts directly, but then I have to update these by hand., because they are linked to my HD and not to to the script stores.
But scripts ofers possibilities which in extensions don't exist, less in those from the store.
We'll see.

barbudo2005

@Catweazle

Said:

Tampermonkey is nice, but it's proprietary soft, Violent- and Greasymonkey are FOSS.

What does this have to do with MV3?

Or do you think that because it is FOSS it will not be subject to the Manifest?

Catweazle

@barbudo2005, of course, these will also have to be updated (if they have not already done so). Only it is preferable to use these two instead of Tampermonkey, being FOSS.

RasheedHolland

@rseiler said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

I just read about it, but Vivaldi could block this right? I mean old extensions should be able to work, even if Google removes them from the Web Store, no? And what does the registry workaround exactly do?

Yes, Vivaldi might.

But if not, that's what "ExtensionManifestV2Availability" is about. It's Google's so-called Enterprise Policy designed for those who wish to delay what's happening until June 2025.

@Hadden89 said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

@RasheedHolland said in How will Vivaldi deal with Google's Manifest V3?:

Vivaldi could block this right?

Until the policy exists. But it requires user intervention (see below why). So we should have an year of grace.

I mean old extensions should be able to work, even if Google removes them from the Web Store, no?

Yes and no. A lot of extensions which requires V2 APIs will be likely not be developed anymore - because as long the chromium development proceed - they will continue to phase out the part of the chromium which make work the legacy API (V2). In the long term, they will just stop to work to function on newer releases.

Also, they will test the new chromium around the V3 API, so anything you still use with V2 is partially supported or not supported at all from a dev point of view.

And what does the registry workaround exactly do?

It simply tells to chromium extensions page to ignore the fact the user is using addons with manifest V2 , allowing to use it for the intended period of time. It should also allow to install them from the store, likely for six month or less.

Thanks for the info guys, I now understand it better. I believe that most of the 10 extensions that I use are still actively developed, so they will probably switch to MV3, hopefully without any drawbacks. The biggest problem is of course uBlock Origin, since it might be severely crippled. That's why I believe that Vivaldi should soon beef up its adblocker.

barbudo2005

Is OK?