Steve, Something I gleaned from irc://moznet/addons might interest you. http://people.mozilla.com/~polvi/threedom/3.0-in-queue.csv
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 "compatibility" 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 4:29 AM, Michael Vincent van Rantwijk, MultiZilla >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 >> [email protected] >> https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners >> > > _______________________________________________ > Project_owners mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners > > _______________________________________________ > Project_owners mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners > > _______________________________________________ Project_owners mailing list [email protected] https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
