[Project_owners] AMO vs. mozdev was: Awaiting extension upgrade approval

John Woods johnrw at gmail.com
Tue Jul 8 10:22:40 PDT 2008


I should also add that it seems that if something is not signed...
Firefox will disable any update checking. (Whaaaaaaaaat!)

I only caught that message once in my testing of a compatibility release...
so I am still not sure of what criteria needs to pass... but I think
it was upgrade
checking becoming disabled without a signed xpi.

Not an issue on downloads from amo.

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:53 PM, John Woods <johnrw at gmail.com> wrote:
> Real quick... off the top of my head...
>
> "Get more Addons"... navigates there.
>
> It has no scarry scarry messages about bad extensions... like mozdev gets...
>
> ie it is whitelisted by default... mozdev is not.
> It allows xpi installs without any signature hassles.
> (Like nobody has ever installed VIA drivers before and
> quickly waved off any warning about signed drivers...)
>
> So they are pretty much coopting distribution by user experience.
> What's hard to do elsewhere... is easy at amo.
>
> When I think of Firefox's main claim to fame being "Tabbed Browsing", and THAT
> having been developed at mozdev... by HJ(I wonder often how HJ is
> doing?) I wanna
> puke on the current mozilla crew. (A read of this bug... solves that notion
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=324227 roflmao)
>
> John
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:41 PM, Godmar Back <godmar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Related to the AMO approval thread:
>>
>> Could somebody summarize what the advantages of hosting on AMO are as
>> compared to hosting at mozdev?
>>
>>  - Godmar
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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