[Project_owners] Awaiting extension upgrade approval

John Woods johnrw at gmail.com
Tue Jul 8 07:53:49 PDT 2008


Something I gleaned from irc://moznet/addons might interest you.

I have no idea how accurate that is. Someone plopped it in on the channel.

But, 6846 does not seem to be listed.

I swear there should be a timeout function on amo... where if an extension's
new version is not reviewed in a certain time... it goes public. 2 months
is not acceptable. 2 weeks even.

Totally new extensions, without any prior author history... is about the only
legitimate "security" concern... but even a new extension by an author who does
have a reputation of sorts... is not a case where his/her extension's
release needs to have the source code scanned for Blue Meanies.

These guys are losing it.

John Woods
skype: john.r.woods

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Steve Lambert <steve at visitsteve.com> wrote:
> I'll just chime in quickly here because I can't help it.  I am normally not
> a complainer, I swear...
> I've had an add-on nominated for over 2 months.
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/developers/details/6846
> Before FF3 (which we are still working on making it compatible with) we had
> 1,200 active users.  The plugin has been written about in the NY Times.  I
> could go on...
> I'm currently maintaining two releases - one on our own servers signed with
> the mccoy tool which is time consuming, and this AMO version.
> I only learned about mozdev recently and hoping it will make our process
> easier.
> We've got about 5-10 really smart people working on development and barriers
> created by lack of documentation are amazing.  We should be able to figure
> this stuff out, but when you get to a certain level, it feels like it's all
> insider knowledge that you have to tease out of people on irc.
> I'll stop there... thanks for letting me vent a little.
> Steve
> --
> Steve Lambert
> http://visitsteve.com
> Eyebeam Senior Fellow
> http://eyebeam.org
> On Jul 8, 2008, at 2:31 AM, Ramiro Aparicio wrote:
> I think AMO is important and with the increased interaction on firefox 3 it
> is more important than ever, the idea es to have a repository with all
> extension, themes... which is great but if every extension update has to
> wait for 3-4 weeks to be reviewed then thats your bottleneck, and it should
> be done something to address that problem, also the bag instead FIFO system
> really sucks, at least try to promote the older unreviewed extensions or
> whatever.
> In my case a extension with more than 120.000 users (AMO stats) have been
> waiting in the bag for 3 weeks, the last weekend I released an update to fix
> a bunch of bugs and we will see when it will be reviewed.
> And Onno, releasing in advance of FF release would be a great idea if they
> stop making last minute changes, I had to change a lot of code between RC1
> and RC2 becouse of the new security restrictions that were added and 3 days
> before download day I was filling a bug due to a regression in RC3.
> I don't know whats the best system probably you don't have to pay for
> reviewers, but make a good campaign to get more, give them points for
> reviews and let them get some free merchandising with the points, and
> probably you will reduce the problem a lot.
> Hasta Otra
> Ramiro Aparicio
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Desarrollador de FoxGame http://foxgame.mozdev.org
> Blogero aficionado en http://www.habitaquo.net
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Onno Ekker <o.e.ekker at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 4:29 AM, Michael Vincent van Rantwijk, MultiZilla
>> <mv_van_rantwijk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> AMO isn't an absolute necessity to release new versions of your software.
>>> Surely you must know that by now, especially since you post here ;)
>> You don't need AMO, but it helps greatly getting your extention to end
>> users. I have a small Thunderbird extension and had about 2 downloads a day
>> on mozdev, 5 on AMO before going public and now 30...
>> Most end users on AMO won't go looking for an update on your project
>> website. They won't even realize there might be a newer version there, or in
>> the sandbox.
>>> I would however like to advise you to open your favorite IRC proggy and
>>> go beg for support (insert you devils smiley here).  Now seriously, this has
>>> got to change a.s.a.p.  I agree. And totally!
>> Project owners could have helped to take the strain from editors too, by
>> not waiting for the next major release to update their add-on, but starting
>> with it as soon as the first alpha was released (or even before that). Once
>> an extension is compatible (and reviewed), you only need to bump maxVersion
>> if it stays compatible and no further reviewing is necessary for that. Some
>> project owners probably have done that, but others have waited too long and
>> now suffer the consequences of that.
>> If you don't like the way AMO/reviewing is working, it might be an idea to
>> file a bug for it. Or vote for one, if you can find an existing one. But
>> (all/most?) reviewers are volunteers, just like you and me, and they do
>> their best to review each add-on.
>> Onno
>> _______________________________________________
>> Project_owners mailing list
>> Project_owners at mozdev.org
>> https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
> _______________________________________________
> Project_owners mailing list
> Project_owners at mozdev.org
> https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
> _______________________________________________
> Project_owners mailing list
> Project_owners at mozdev.org
> https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners

More information about the Project_owners mailing list