<story><title>Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin</title><url>https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=896897&amp;desc=2#c23</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>edwintorok</author><text>What if someone would create a pull request to implement unlock origin natively inside chromium, instead of an extension. If such a PR met all technical criteria, would Chromium project accept it?</text></item><item><author>metalliqaz</author><text>But the design document only mentions retaining the old API for features that aren&amp;#x27;t possible with the new API, such as onAuthRequired.  So it would still cripple uBlock</text></item><item><author>dragonwriter</author><text>The design doc — the part quoted in the note linked here even — explicitly notes that it will probably be required to retain some degree of the existing functionality slated for eventually removal until the new API and other replacements cover all use cases; the response linked here appears to (not improperly, in the context of making a case for why much of the functionality is needed) ignoring that and treating the planned intent as removing all of the existing WebRequest API functionality that is not observational for a hard cutover to the new API which does not immediately supports large swath of currently used functionality.&lt;p&gt;I think the response is appropriate, energetic advocacy, but the HN headline is hyperbolic.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>berbec</author><text>No. Google would not include, as a built-in part of Chromium that is installed by default, a feature to lower their ad revenue.</text></comment>
<story><title>Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin</title><url>https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=896897&amp;desc=2#c23</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>edwintorok</author><text>What if someone would create a pull request to implement unlock origin natively inside chromium, instead of an extension. If such a PR met all technical criteria, would Chromium project accept it?</text></item><item><author>metalliqaz</author><text>But the design document only mentions retaining the old API for features that aren&amp;#x27;t possible with the new API, such as onAuthRequired.  So it would still cripple uBlock</text></item><item><author>dragonwriter</author><text>The design doc — the part quoted in the note linked here even — explicitly notes that it will probably be required to retain some degree of the existing functionality slated for eventually removal until the new API and other replacements cover all use cases; the response linked here appears to (not improperly, in the context of making a case for why much of the functionality is needed) ignoring that and treating the planned intent as removing all of the existing WebRequest API functionality that is not observational for a hard cutover to the new API which does not immediately supports large swath of currently used functionality.&lt;p&gt;I think the response is appropriate, energetic advocacy, but the HN headline is hyperbolic.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>philliphaydon</author><text>Of course not.</text></comment>