Per-Addon "Exclude from Sync"

[pepoluan]

I suggest adding a feature in which we can exclude certain addons from syncing.

For example, I have 2 laptops: One running KDE Neon, one running Windows 10. The Firefox on KDE Neon has the "Plasma Integration" add-on, which is totally useless on Windows 10. Therefore, it shouldn't be synced among my computers.

[Jon]

Thanks for submitting an idea to the Mozilla Connect community! Your idea is now open to votes (aka kudos) and comments.

[KERR]

Allow Firefox sync to backup/sync addon data

Currently, when you sign into a new FF and it syncs, all your history/bookmarks/addons are synced across.

Unfortunately, you have to reconfigure all your addons - their prefs/data/config are NOT synced.

Given how annoying it is to backup/restore addon data, it would be great to bridge the gap by allowing sync to retain the addon settings.

https://askubuntu.com/questions/141803/how-can-i-backup-installed-firefox-add-ons-and-restore

[jscher2000]

Hi Kerr, add-on authors have the choice of storing data either in "local" storage (which does not sync) or "managed" storage (which does sync). Sometimes they give the user a choice in their settings.

The reason authors don't just use managed storage for everything is that it is capped at a small amount of data, and add-ons break as soon as that amount is exceeded. Hopefully Mozilla can increase the cap in the future, but understandably, Sync isn't going to be able to handle unlimited data.

[hasecilu]

Definitively this!

Maybe a matrix implementation, for example: you have 10 addons and 4 devices, a table with 10 columns and 4 rows is generated, in every cell there is a checkbox, with this you can choose what addons will be installed in every device.

My main machine have 18 addons but my old trusty laptop gets very slow =(

[C0oo1D]

> Sync isn't going to be able to handle unlimited data.
Why? As i know, sync data is stored on user devices, not on Mozilla servers. So.. it would be nice to offer user an option to sync local data with selected devices, indicating their current size of course and possible problems if user will use it.

[Rescue9]

Came here specifically to request this. I also have multiple devices. One of the extensions that causes a lot of lag and problems is Metamask. While I don't mind the lag on my main machine when I'm working with crypto, having my other machines lag every time I open a new tab or browse a new page really kills productivity.

Don't know about the whole "matrix" idea posted above, but a toggle would definitely work. A simple "Don't sync this extension across multiple devices" would allow me to install the extensions I want on a per device basis.

[andrade]

I'll add that in addition to selecting which extensions to sync, it should also allow selecting which other stuff to sync per profile, namely themes.

I have multiple Firefox profiles, all with the same account, on the same machine and on different machines. It'd be useful if I could use different themes for each of these.

---

A way this could work would be having a root profile (R) with "global settings" and a list of virtual sub-profiles (V1, V2, V3, etc) which inherit the "global settings" but can override those settings to have "per profile settings". These would be virtual profiles, not the actual physical profiles we have on the machine in Ubuntu, Windows, etc.

In the sync settings window we have now, we'd have something similar for Profile R with the defaults, and then one set of configurations for each Profile Vx the user creates. Basically each Vx would have a list with extensions and other functionality and the user selects for each functionality/extension whether to sync up/down to R or to sync up/down only to profile Vx.

(In addition, for each physical profile, there'd be another option to keep local and not sync up/down a particular extension/functionality.)

Now when the user creates a new profile in a machine, it sets up sync and decides whether to apply virtual Profile R with all defaults, or apply one of the virtual sub-profiles to the physical profile on the machine.

Question: Why am I suggesting the use of virtual profiles, and not doing this directly on the physical profiles on the machines (Windows, Ubuntu, etc)?

My rationale is that we can have, and do have, multiple profiles on the same machines and in different machines.

For example, assume three virtual profiles, V1 for personal stuff, V2 for learning a new skill, and V3 for pet projects:

• Machine 1 (Ubuntu laptop) has three physical profiles P1, P2, P3 that could setup sync with virtual profiles V1, V2, V3, respectively.
• Machine 2 (Windows) has only one physical profile, P4, that sets up sync using V1 (personal stuff).
• Machine 3 (Ubuntu desktop) has three physical profiles, P5 sync'd with V2 (learning a new skill), and P6, P7 sync'd with V3 (one for pet project A and another dedicated to pet project B; both share same virtual profile V3, but have different physical profiles on the machine for better separation of tabs and also because it allows having one window per workspace).

In this example, Profile V1 could have a green theme and extensions E1, E2, E3, which would be applied to the physical profile P1 in Machine 1, and the physical profile P4 in Machine 2. And Profile V2 could have a red theme and extensions E1, E3, and E4 which would sync between physical profiles P2 in Machine 1 and P5 in Machine 3. They'd all share things like bookmarks, history, passwords, etc (inherited from base defaults for virtual root profile R) unless selected otherwise in the virtual sub-profile settings.