Add support for Chromium based browser

[samyakbardiya]

Added support for Chromium-based browsers. I tested the code in both Chrome ^{129.0.6643.2 dev (arm64)} & Firefox ^{130.0b3 (64-bit)}, and it works perfectly.

Changes

• Using chrome.* instead of browser.* for only Chromium-based browsers, as requested to use browser.* for the added advantages in Firefox.
• Added both background.service_worker & background.scripts to manifest.json. As mentioned here, this works, but it results in warnings in both Firefox and Chrome about the other value being unrecognized.
• Removed loadReplace as there is no counterpart in the Chromium side.

[dmlls]

Hi @samyakbardiya and thank you for your contribution!

Apparently from Firefox 121, background.service_worker can coexist with background.scripts on Firefox (the former will just be ignored), which indeed allows us to include both in the manifest.

I'll merge this PR, solve the conflicts from the Manifest v3 migration PR, and publish a new release.

[samyakbardiya]

Thanks, @dmlls :)

Also, I have been using this extensively in Arc (Chromium base) browser since the PR and have found only one issue so far. The issue is that many times, the bang conversion does not happen the very first time. However, if I simply refresh, it then happens. I haven't been able to understand why this is occurring.

[dmlls]

Thanks for the extensive testing!

What do you exactly mean by conversion? The bang doesn't trigger?

Maybe you can try to load the add-on in developer mode and check if the bangs are loaded correctly in the first place. I'm already working on the release, I will also of course test things thoroughly before releasing.

[samyakbardiya]

Yes, I meant the triggering. And yes, I'm using the add-on in develop mode only, and it has been loaded properly, though, with 2 warnings about the manifest.

Warnings:

• 'background.scripts' requires manifest version of 2 or lower.
• Unrecognized manifest key 'browser_specific_settings'.

[dmlls]

I see. Maybe you can try to add a console.log(bangs) in this line to check whether the bangs object gets populated correctly?

[samyakbardiya]

Sure @dmlls, will check it for a few days.