[Project_owners] You are all wasting your time on mozdev.org...

Eric H. Jung eric.jung at yahoo.com
Mon Nov 19 07:26:11 PST 2007


--- Robert Kaiser <KaiRo at KaiRo.at> wrote:

> [mozdev] isn't an add-ons download entry point for all users. A

mozdev is whatever a project-owner wants it to be. If a project-owner wants it to be the "primary
download entry point" for his add-on, then he tailors it to be just that. We have plenty of
examples of such projects. One which springs to mind is multizilla, but there are many others.

> If the review times 
> there discourage you, then what you should do is help that situation by 
> taking part in the review process

I don't agree. Participating in the review process means sacrificing time towards developing
addons. There is a large audience of people who want to develop in their limited free time, not
review. Other alternatives to your suggestion:

1. Push for AMO to change its review process
2. Publish your addons to both AMO and another site (e.g., mozdev)
3. Ignore AMO

...and I'm sure there are some I've missed.

> as it's not designed to be that) the prime entry point for users downloading 
> extensions/add-ons.

As I wrote earlier, mozdev is most definitely the prime entry point for users downloading *some*
extensions/addons. The addon author is free to use mozdev in this way, so it's unclear to me why
you claim mozdev isn't "designed to be that". How is it that you decide what mozdev is designed
for and what it isn't?

> AMO is and will be in the foreseeable future the 
> prime entry point for add-on downloads for Mozilla applications, at 
> least for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey and Sunbird.

Choice benefits the consumer. Monopolies do not. You may view AMO "as the prime entry point for
add-on downloads for Mozilla applications", and indeed some Mozilla employees may view AMO that
way, too, but not all users do.

Eric Jung
mozdev.org board of directors




More information about the Project_owners mailing list