Axel, are you talking about QuickFolders? I can review it for you since I've done that before and am already familiar with it. Let me know. I wouldn't be able to get to it until this weekend, however.
Eric On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Axel <[email protected]> wrote: > Yep. Now just wait 3 months (I'm not exaggerating) for the update to be > approved and it will appear on the main listing. > > Yes, Malte. > > I am afraid you're right. I think there should be either a 2-tier system for > people who release often (I release on average once a month) or a mentoring > system, where reviewers who have already reviewed a version get the option > of reviewing new releases of their favorite plugin again - wouldn't that > save a lot of testing time? For us extension developers I am sure it would > be possible to make a case for how important a particular bugfix / feature > was... I have 3 new translators waiting for their hard work to go online, a > catastrophic bug in Linux (complete TB crash) that was fixed weeks ago, and > support for a new application (SeaMonkey) - I got the call for a compatible > version from the SeaMonkey guys 2 or 3 weeks ago. I bet the new users would > have loved to download the plugin, but they can not see it because the > current version (it is the fourth release that is waiting for review) is > hidden in the "old versions" section. > > I also think that unreviewed new versions of already reviewed extensions > should be featured more prominently on the AMO plugin pages, I tend to get > bug reports for stuff that I have fixed long ago and the ordinary users > don't know where to look. Seriously considering hosting elsewhere, if it > wasn't yet another leraning curve and possibly hosting costs...1500 > downloads per week kind of adds up over time... > > why shouldn't it possible to contact a reviewer directly if he already knows > your plugin? It would surely make the review process more efficient. The > other thing that annoys me a little is that there are a plethora of newbie > plugins out there that pretty much don't add much value to the host apps, > and they are clogging up the whole system and also obscure the good ones - > it gets harder to find decent plugins for the "background noise" of > imitators etc. I don't know a solution against this, because everybody > should be able to contribute but the ones that get most attention from their > developers should also get the best chance to be recognized? Naw, I don't > know... as I said I haven't a solution. > > Ever thought for yourself: I know the perfect plugin for my purpose is out > there, I just have to find it? > > 2009/11/18 Michael J Gruber [email protected] >> >> Only when I click on "show previous versions" (or something like that, >> this is back-translated from l10n) the sandboxed version is shown as >> experimental. I guess this is considered normal behavior. > > Yep. Now just wait 3 months (I'm not exaggerating) for the update to be > approved and it will appear on the main listing. > > ________________________________ > > > -- > > ================================== > Axel Grude > Senior Software Developer > GenBase Solutions Ltd > Registered in Ireland, No. 317957 > Registered address: Parkmore Business Park West, Galway. > www.genbase.ie > phone: 091 746 965 > ================================== > > sig: try firefox. it supports www standards better! > > disclaimer: personal opinion, not my employer's > > _______________________________________________ > 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
