Add-ons Review Update – Week of 2010/05/11

Jorge Villalobos

5

Summary

  • These bi-weekly posts explain the current state of add-on reviews and other information relevant to add-on developers. There’s a lengthy overview of the Add-on Review Process posted in this blog that should be read as a general guide about the review process.
  • Most nominations are being reviewed within 2 weeks. Our goal is have them all under 1 week by July.
  • Almost every update is being reviewed within 4 days. We want to reduce this more in the future, but nominations are the current priority.

The Review Queues

  • The stats are taken from the latest queue report from last Friday.
  • 75 new nominations that week. 117 nominations in the queue awaiting review.
  • 42 updates that week. 42 updates in the queue awaiting review.
  • 164 reviews performed by AMO Editors this month. There were 15 editors performing reviews last week.

See the Add-on Review Process and You for information on how to check your  add-on status.

Notes for Developers

  • Last week we updated our review policies, as explained in an earlier blog post. All authors should read this, specially the section on changing defaults.
  • AMO is currently being migrated to a new code base, some of which is already live in production. If you notice any strange behavior on AMO, please make sure to file a bug (see note below about AMO bug reporting).
  • We’re currently discussing a proposal that will substantially change the way we see and deal with unreviewed add-ons, and will have a significant impact on all add-on developers. All add-on developers should read the ongoing discussion at the AMO Forum. The proposal has seen many changes based on feedback from the community, and this is the time to voice your concerns and ideas.
  • Fennec (Firefox Mobile) is quickly approaching its 1.1 release, and add-on authors should make sure their Fennec add-ons are up to date in compatibility. 1.1.* is now a valid max version string for Fennec add-ons. Remember you can change your max version on AMO without having to upload a new file!
  • Useful Information for Add-on Authors. How to improve review times for your add-on, information about the review process, etc.
  • Bugzilla information for editors. How to file AMO bugs, how to flag bugs relevant for editors, and information on current and future AMO version releases. Let me know if you want to help fixing AMO bugs.

Jorge Villalobos

Add-ons Developer Relations Lead, Mozilla

5 responses

  1. Mook wrote on :

    Of the two proposals on the table, neither one of them is actually clear. Your version sounds better, but only because fligtar’s proposal sounds like there is some sort of recurring review going on of the same uploaded file. I’d expect any implementations to have a “security review this addon” checkbox or similar on the upload screen, possibly checked by default, though, since there’s no longer any point in not doing that. (Of course, the reviewers also shouldn’t say things outside of security, such as properly scoping variables, if it’s not a full review…)

    At what sort of rate is unreviewed addons being added to AMO?

  2. Jorge wrote on ::

    @Mook: yes, I think when submitting your add-on for the first time you would have an option with 3 possible values:
    1) Nominate to Public -> submit the add-on for review and publication.
    2) Review and keep as experimental -> submit the add-on for review only. It can later be nominated to be public, but it will require a new (full) review.
    3) Don’t review -> in this case the add-on would have a 30 day time limit where it will have very restricted exposure. Then it will require a review or become invisible.

  3. another_sam wrote on :

    Can’t do login at AMO right now; or at least I don’t see my developer menu but the register/login links again.

    Do you have the same behavior? If not I’ll be more formal and go bugzilla XD

    Thanks.

  4. Jorge wrote on ::

    @another_sam: yes, there was a login problem, but it was fixed the same day you posted that comment. It should be working now. let me know if it isn’t.

  5. Juan Ramon wrote on :

    When you search an add-on for Thunderbird the search engine send you to Firefox Add-ons.

    I don’t know if it’s here the best place to post this comment.
    Let me know.

    Thanks.