[Project_owners] Should mozdev.org generate an updates.rdf file for our projects?

Douglas E. Warner silfreed at silfreed.net
Fri Dec 7 12:36:49 PST 2007

On Friday 07 December 2007, Eric H. Jung wrote:
> > 1) PO uploads their XPI file to their downloads/ folder
> Can't this be done from the HTML pages in steps 2-3 using <input
> type="file"/>?

Mozdev only supports adding download files through CVS at this time.

> > 3) PO chooses "release" beside the file and is asked to provide the
> > following information:
> >   a) file hash (md5/sha1) to verify the file was uploaded properly
> >   b) update info url
> For 3b: the update url is already provided in install.rdf, which is within
> the previously uploaded XPI, as a text node child of the <em:updateURL/>
> element. Therefore, no need to prompt the user for it again--right?

I was referring to <em:updateInfoURL/>.  From re-reading the spec, this is 
probably an optional feature since it is being introduced in Gecko 1.9.

> I don't know if incremental updates are still forced by the extension
> manager. I hope they are :)

I kinda figured as much; otherwise an extension would continue to bloat over 
time since the developer could never remove update code.

Given that, does there need to be a way to "age out" old updates, or once a 
developer creates an extension, all updates have to be in the update.rdf 
(singular!) until the end of time?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://www.mozdev.org/pipermail/project_owners/attachments/20071207/da20deff/attachment.bin 

More information about the Project_owners mailing list