That would be great, mskadu. Only thing that might interfere with this is the fact that Ubiquity's install.rdf currently points at ubiquity.mozilla.com for updates; I assume that AMO would change this.
Go ahead and upload 0.1.2 and let us know how it goes! - Atul On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 11:23 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
