In bug 1330349 Andrew mentioned - and Dave T. concurred - that we should use a different bootstrap mechanism for WebExtension Themes than the regular full-blown WebExtension one, using just `ExtensionData` and not `Extension` as a whole. In practice that'd mean to start with using a new file 'ThemeExtensionBootstrap.js' instead of 'WebExtensionBootstrap.js' as we do now in XPIProvider.jsm

I don't this is terribly _hard_ (in: complicated) to do, but I'm interested in hearing the real benefits that'd justify this work. Adding a fork in the flow has a cost too - even though we may limit the amount of functionality we expose to theme WebExtensions (being a good thing). If things like the L10n init are indeed costly enough, then that'd be a more than valid reason to add the fork.

mass move of existing themes bugs to new WebExtensions: Themes component

Hi Andrew, With the recent refactorings Kris and you have done, is this still something that needs to be fixed ?

(In reply to Tim Nguyen :ntim from comment #3) > With the recent refactorings Kris and you have done, is this still something > that needs to be fixed ? Yes, I think this would still be worthwhile.