Godmar Back wrote:
Related to the AMO approval thread:
Could somebody summarize what the advantages of hosting on AMO are as
compared to hosting at mozdev?
Besides the advantages John listed, AMO focuses on distribution to the
hundreds of millions of Mozilla users, while Mozdev focuses on tools for
project owners, so they have very different target audiences.
I see them as complementary. Mozdev is the place to host your project,
while AMO is the place to distribute it. So I recommend "hosting" on both.
And despite all the bitter vitriol by inveterate MoFo/MoCo-haters, AMO
has made a significant positive impact in the web experience for Mozilla
users and has been a good thing for Mozdev as well, since its ease of
use and attention to security expands the pool of users willing to try
the extensions developed here.
Nevertheless, it's true that the AMO review process is broken. It's
been getting better, though. For example, extensions no longer need
review to be visible on the site (users just need to log in to install
them).
So rather than giving up on it, the better thing to do would be to
continue to press our concerns with the AMO dev team. That'll do much
more to get our extensions distributed to our users than simply giving
up on AMO and distributing from Mozdev (no matter how much effort we
expend, at significant opportunity cost, to improve Mozdev distribution).
-myk
_______________________________________________
Project_owners mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
