Comments on: Coming Up for AMO http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/ Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:23:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: avih http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/comment-page-1/#comment-9542 avih Thu, 03 Sep 2009 16:28:04 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/?p=799#comment-9542 This is nice and all (no complaints) BUT, in practice there are more urgent issues, i.e.: 1. I know my extension (SmoothWheel v0.44.18) doesn't work with the trunk builds. This is due to a change that causes Firefox to reject chrome registrations the "old" way (contents.rdf) and only accepts the "new" way (chrome.manifest). Firefox (trunk) behaves badly in such cases by installing the extension but it locks up when trying to invoke the extensions GUI. So I quickly "fix" my extension, test it for few days and upload it to AMO. Now I wait. Almost a month already. For a minor bug fix to be approved. For a relatively high profile extension (rated top 10, downloaded top 5%). And no word from anyone even when I ask. So what does it help if we (developers) get all this info but new versions are just stuck at the queue? Which brings me to: 1. We (developers) need a way to know the position of our extensions in the approval queue. I know it isn't linear or too consistent but there must be SOMETHING that will give us some indication about where it currently stands. If it's completely unorganized then this should be fixed. Set "buckets" of status, and a position or other indication within each such bucket. This is nice and all (no complaints) BUT, in practice there are more urgent issues, i.e.:

1. I know my extension (SmoothWheel v0.44.18) doesn’t work with the trunk builds. This is due to a change that causes Firefox to reject chrome registrations the “old” way (contents.rdf) and only accepts the “new” way (chrome.manifest). Firefox (trunk) behaves badly in such cases by installing the extension but it locks up when trying to invoke the extensions GUI. So I quickly “fix” my extension, test it for few days and upload it to AMO.

Now I wait. Almost a month already. For a minor bug fix to be approved. For a relatively high profile extension (rated top 10, downloaded top 5%). And no word from anyone even when I ask. So what does it help if we (developers) get all this info but new versions are just stuck at the queue?

Which brings me to:

1. We (developers) need a way to know the position of our extensions in the approval queue. I know it isn’t linear or too consistent but there must be SOMETHING that will give us some indication about where it currently stands. If it’s completely unorganized then this should be fixed. Set “buckets” of status, and a position or other indication within each such bucket.

]]> By: Archaeopteryx http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/comment-page-1/#comment-8868 Archaeopteryx Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:11:11 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/?p=799#comment-8868 Sound very promising except the Add-on Compatibility Reporter. Users usually will not check if the whole add-on works as expected and immediately label it as compatible after they checked the first feature of it (or even only if the UI is present). Sound very promising except the Add-on Compatibility Reporter. Users usually will not check if the whole add-on works as expected and immediately label it as compatible after they checked the first feature of it (or even only if the UI is present).

]]> By: Ken Saunders http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/comment-page-1/#comment-8708 Ken Saunders Fri, 21 Aug 2009 18:23:36 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/?p=799#comment-8708 Ever hear of Windows Marketplace? PLEASE DON'T EVER CREATE AN ADD-ONS STORE!!!!! I'm fine with developers offering pro versions of their add-ons as long as they make it clear and the ones on AMO are NOT demos and/or have disabled functionality, but I don't want to see AMO or Mozilla ever take that road. The most popular add-on for Firefox is free, and from what I've read, will remain so despite the developer getting offers to write it for other another browser. He could make bucket loads of cash doing so, but has chosen not to as have the majority of add-on developers. They always have the choice of writing add-ons to be sold on Windows Marketplace. Ever hear of Windows Marketplace?

PLEASE DON’T EVER CREATE AN ADD-ONS STORE!!!!!

I’m fine with developers offering pro versions of their add-ons as long as they make it clear and the ones on AMO are NOT demos and/or have disabled functionality, but I don’t want to see AMO or Mozilla ever take that road.

The most popular add-on for Firefox is free, and from what I’ve read, will remain so despite the developer getting offers to write it for other another browser. He could make bucket loads of cash doing so, but has chosen not to as have the majority of add-on developers.

They always have the choice of writing add-ons to be sold on Windows Marketplace.

]]> By: Goolic http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/comment-page-1/#comment-8705 Goolic Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:31:26 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/?p=799#comment-8705 Why haven't you guys talked at all about making an add-on store??? Sure i like my free add-ons but i'm certain that there would be some seriously wicked for-pay addons:) Not to say that the current free model haven't put out some incredible works but i'm incredible curious on the range and quality off the paid addons would have to put so they can compete with free or ad-sponsored Why haven’t you guys talked at all about making an add-on store??? Sure i like my free add-ons but i’m certain that there would be some seriously wicked for-pay addons:)

Not to say that the current free model haven’t put out some incredible works but i’m incredible curious on the range and quality off the paid addons would have to put so they can compete with free or ad-sponsored

]]> By: Michael Kaply http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/comment-page-1/#comment-8699 Michael Kaply Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:18:15 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/?p=799#comment-8699 > We enacted a No Surprises policy in an effort to protect user choice, but unfortunately continue to find surprises. No you didn't. You posted to a blog and said, and I quote: "The text of our proposal is below." A proposal is not a policy. There was never another post indicated that the proposal was now policy. Where is this document that has AMO policies? > We enacted a No Surprises policy in an effort to protect user choice, but unfortunately continue to find surprises.

No you didn’t. You posted to a blog and said, and I quote:

“The text of our proposal is below.”

A proposal is not a policy. There was never another post indicated that the proposal was now policy.

Where is this document that has AMO policies?

]]> By: Standard8 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/comment-page-1/#comment-8680 Standard8 Fri, 21 Aug 2009 07:39:16 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/?p=799#comment-8680 How about a version update mailing list or something? e.g. TB 3.xb4 has now been added to the compatibility flags - time to update your extensions. Or maybe an auto-update facility for some things - mainly dictionaries - "this dictionary is compatible with all versions of gecko until someone changes the API. Auto-update the compatibility flag for me and email me when the API update is broken". How about a version update mailing list or something? e.g. TB 3.xb4 has now been added to the compatibility flags – time to update your extensions.

Or maybe an auto-update facility for some things – mainly dictionaries – “this dictionary is compatible with all versions of gecko until someone changes the API. Auto-update the compatibility flag for me and email me when the API update is broken”.

]]> By: Ken Saunders http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2009/08/20/coming-up-for-amo/comment-page-1/#comment-8671 Ken Saunders Fri, 21 Aug 2009 03:34:27 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/?p=799#comment-8671 Collections Phase II "Thunderbird & Fennec support for the Add-on Collector" - Awesome! Add-on Developer Hub "Add-on Builder - A tool to generate skeletons for extensions" - Well that's cool "Code Search" - Also cool Disclosure of Add-on Practices - AMEN! Add-on Compatibility Reporter - Have I said cool yet? Ok, how 'bout awesome? I did? Ok, awesomely cool? The chances would be pretty good that an alpha or beta Firefox user would actually take the time to add details to the "field to describe the problems" of an add-on considering that they're helping to test out software to begin with. Great work on all! I can't wait to see everything come together. But I guess that I'm going to have to aren't I? :| Collections Phase II
“Thunderbird & Fennec support for the Add-on Collector” – Awesome!

Add-on Developer Hub
“Add-on Builder – A tool to generate skeletons for extensions” – Well that’s cool
“Code Search” – Also cool

Disclosure of Add-on Practices – AMEN!

Add-on Compatibility Reporter – Have I said cool yet? Ok, how ’bout awesome? I did? Ok, awesomely cool?
The chances would be pretty good that an alpha or beta Firefox user would actually take the time to add details to the “field to describe the problems” of an add-on considering that they’re helping to test out software to begin with.

Great work on all! I can’t wait to see everything come together.
But I guess that I’m going to have to aren’t I? :|

]]>