I'd be happy to help with this. All it needs is the last XPI and an icon. So to begin with, here's what we can expect:
(extract) *Thanks for your interest in submitting your add-on to Mozilla Add-ons. Hosting your add-on on Mozilla Add-ons is the easiest way to handle distribution of your add-on. Here's what you'll get:* - *Each add-on will have a public display page with information you provide, such as a brief summary of the add-on's functionality, an optional longer description, and a showcase of preview screenshots of your add-on. * - *Your add-on will appear in search and browse listings across the site, and even in the Add-ons Manager of Firefox 3.* - *We'll take care of hosting all of your downloads and providing automatic updates to users when you upload a new version.* - *You'll have access to a statistics dashboard with detailed information about your user base.* *Add-ons hosted on the site must be reviewed by a Mozilla Add-ons Editor before they will have all of the features listed above.* (extract ends) So do I just simply upload v0.1.2? -- Mayuresh On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Atul Varma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Gary! > > mskadu, there's an item on the Roadmap Proposals wiki page under > "Stabilization of Current Feature Set" for getting Ubiquity on AMO as a > non-experimental addon. That's a good point about at least getting it into > the experimental sandbox though, if we put it on there with the stated > intention that it shouldn't be let out of the sandbox because of known > security issues. Does anyone want to look into doing this? > > - Atul > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:43 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Just curious as to (still) why there are no plans to make Ubiquity >> available on FF addons site - addons.mozilla.org (even if as a >> experimental addon)? >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Gary Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> Atul - for me, that wiki page sums up the proposals very well! >>> Sufficiently detailed to understand what motivates each goal, a good range >>> of targets, without sounding like a wishy-washy 'mission statement'. >>> If I think of more, I will certainly throw them on there for discussion. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Gary >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 1:36 AM, Atul Varma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey guys, >>>> >>>> It's clear that there's a lot of really awesome directions Ubiquity can >>>> go, but it looks like we need to focus in on what particular directions we >>>> want to take it over the next two months. As Aza has proposed, we can >>>> innovate the user interface and mechanisms for allowing the community to >>>> contribute to UI innovation; we could also work on the herd, like fern >>>> suggested; and Gary makes a very good argument for stabilizing our current >>>> feature set. >>>> >>>> I've created a work-in-progress 0.2 roadmap on the wiki here: >>>> >>>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Ubiquity/0.2_Roadmap_Proposals >>>> >>>> I've tried adding what people have mentioned here so far. If you guys >>>> don't mind, could you please take a look at it and add anything that you >>>> feel is necessary? Once we've got all our ideas down, we can start >>>> figuring >>>> out how to pare things down based on Ubiquity's vision. Please also feel >>>> free to justify your rationale for features that you're particularly >>>> interested in. >>>> >>>> - Atul >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Abimanyu Raja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> The reason it's called The Herd: http://www.toolness.com/wp/?p=144 >>>>> >>>>> 2008/11/6 indolering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Can we call it something with better connotations than "The Herd?" >>>>>> >>>>>> I mean, the democrats lost, badly, for the past 8 years because they >>>>>> failed to correctly frame (http://tiny.cc/frame448) their viewpoints >>>>>> and evoke the right emotions, until Barak got them all excited with >>>>>> his rhetoric. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's hard to get excited about being a cow : ( >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Oh, and now we should get back on topic : ) >>>>>> -Zak >>>>>> >>>>>> On Nov 4, 6:39 am, "Abimanyu Raja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> > Haha..yes. We should do that. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 2008/11/4 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > Why not get Ubiquity on addons.mozilla.com in the first place? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Abimanyu Raja < >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> Yep, the social aspects like on addons.mozilla.com should also >>>>>> be part of >>>>>> > >> The Herd, imo. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> I agree with Gary. That's why I wanted to include improving >>>>>> performance as >>>>>> > >> a major goal. Specifically, the tickets he mentioned, adding back >>>>>> old >>>>>> > >> features and replacing the annotation service. Regarding planning >>>>>> for 0.2, I >>>>>> > >> think it's just about setting the long term goals. In the end, >>>>>> they have to >>>>>> > >> be broken to smaller milestones as Aza said. So, I think that >>>>>> performance >>>>>> > >> issues, a goal for 0.2, should probably be the focus for 0.1.4 >>>>>> (assuming >>>>>> > >> 0.1.3 is focused on skinning). Or we should swap the focuses. >>>>>> 0.1.3 should >>>>>> > >> be for performance issues. I would really like the context menu >>>>>> and >>>>>> > >> noun-first suggestions back. And of course, we should really try >>>>>> not to >>>>>> > >> break people's current behavior (esp. noun-first suggestions). >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> I feel like we need to delegate work (at least for a few key >>>>>> issues) to >>>>>> > >> make faster progress. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> - Abi >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> 2008/11/4 Gary Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> Hi guys, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>> Whilst some of the goals for 0.2 sound fun, in my opinion there >>>>>> are some >>>>>> > >>> fundamentals that perhaps should be addressed beforehand. For >>>>>> example, >>>>>> > >>> reintroducing functionality that was lost with 0.1.2 (e.g. >>>>>> tickets #358, >>>>>> > >>> #359 & #394 are some I raised about this :-), stabilising the >>>>>> codebase, and >>>>>> > >>> addressing performance. Something else that really needs >>>>>> addressing is the >>>>>> > >>> trust-network and the way commands are subscribed to. I've read >>>>>> a few blog >>>>>> > >>> posts, and received a couple of emails, saying that the major >>>>>> factor that is >>>>>> > >>> stopping people from adopting Ubiquity is the security risk of >>>>>> subscribing >>>>>> > >>> to new commands. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>> Perhaps these are planned for a prior release, but considering >>>>>> 0.1.2 was >>>>>> > >>> about 6 weeks late, and 0.1.3 still has 28 active tickets, >>>>>> planning 0.2 for >>>>>> > >>> the end of 2008 seems a little over-ambitious. I don't want to >>>>>> rain on the >>>>>> > >>> parade - I love hacking away at new stuff with the best of them >>>>>> - but >>>>>> > >>> without some core stability I think the user base will lose >>>>>> interest and >>>>>> > >>> we'll be left with an interesting toy for a handful of people, >>>>>> but no >>>>>> > >>> wide-spread adoption. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>> Of course this is only my take on things, and perhaps not seeing >>>>>> the >>>>>> > >>> bigger picture :-) I hope these comments are taken in a >>>>>> positive way. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>> Cheers >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>> Gary >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Fernando Takai < >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> > >>> > wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> Yes, but herd needs to be improved. For example, we need to add >>>>>> social >>>>>> > >>>> features like rating, commenting -- and we need to have a place >>>>>> to host >>>>>> > >>>> commands, like gist, but ours. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Dean Landolt < >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Fernando Takai < >>>>>> > >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ubiquity planet is like an addon.firefox.com for commands >>>>>> (if im not >>>>>> > >>>>>> mistaken). >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Wouldn't that be the Herd? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Typically planets are just aggregators for specific >>>>>> communities of >>>>>> > >>>>> interest [1] -- so of people that often blog about Ubiquity, >>>>>> it's just one >>>>>> > >>>>> central place that pulls in those posts. Unless you mean >>>>>> something else, >>>>>> > >>>>> Aza? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_(software)<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_%28software%29> >>>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_%28software%29> >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> -- >>>>>> > >>>> Fernando "Takai" >>>>>> > >>>>http://flickr.com/photos/supeertakai >>>>>> > >>>>http://fernandotakai.wordpress.com >>>>>> > >>>>http://fernandotakai.jaiku.com >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > -- >>>>>> > > Mayuresh >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Mayuresh >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ubiquity-firefox" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ubiquity-firefox?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
