Add-ons Review Update – Week of 2010/06/22

1

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 7 days.
  • Almost every update is being reviewed within 3 days.
  • By the end of this month we expect all nominations to be reviewed in less than a week, and all updates in 3 days or less. We’re pretty much there.

The Review Queues

  • The stats are taken from the latest queue report from last Friday.
  • 35 new nominations that week. 37 nominations in the queue awaiting review.
  • 22 updates that week. 24 updates in the queue awaiting review.
  • 593 reviews performed by AMO Editors this month. There were 13 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

  • How to Improve Extension Startup Performance. All extension developers should read this blog post. It explains how extensions can have a significant impact in startup performance and, some very simple steps you can follow to minimize this impact. There’s also a link to some tools that can be used to easily measure startup.
  • Firefox 4 is coming, and with it there are a number of platform changes that will need to be addressed by extension authors. We will increase communication as the launch date becomes clearer, but in the meantime, you should be aware of these: Add-ons Manager with Asynchronous API, Changes in XPCOM, Remote XUL to be RemovedJSM can now be included in chrome JARs.
  • New Proposal for Review Process and Delightful Add-ons. This is a new and different approach to resolve the issue of add-on safety in the sandbox and code reviews. All add-on developers should read this and give feedback. It’s been a long process to try to find the right balance of the many elements involved, and we think this is it.
  • The AMO Editor Guide. This new page in the wiki is a comprehensive guide to the work performed by AMO Editors. It will serve as an introductory guide for new editors, and is a step forward in being as transparent as possible with our review process. There are still some corrections to be made, and I’ll be blogging more about it later this week.
  • 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 the site , please make sure to file a bug (see note below about AMO bug reporting).
  • 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

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: compatibility, developers, documentation, general, policy, releases

One response

  1. Alfred Kayser

    “Almost every update is being reviewed within 3 days.”

    Currently the review time for updates, even for themes with a very long standing history of approved versions, is way more than 3 days.
    This is especially frustrating when there are so many last minute changes to the UI of FF4.0, just before the release of 4.0b1 (and 4.0b2pre).