4 ms·
Many AMO Editors are volunteers, and all are human. We've significantly adjusted the AMO review guidelines and processes to avoid that sort of mishap in the fut
by callahad 10y ago
Many AMO Editors are volunteers, and all are human. We've significantly adjusted the AMO review guidelines and processes to avoid that sort of mishap in the future, as acknowledged at the end of that post.
We're working hard on further changes to the process to reduce the stress and delays associated with manual review, including moving the review process to a post-publication check, instead of a pre-publication requirement. The heavy-handed review process was necessary with the old model of add-ons which had unrestricted access to the browser and to the host system. The new, permissions-based WebExtension model is dramatically easier to audit.
- apostacy 10y agoWell, maybe this failure should be taken as a signal that you're doing something wrong. Google will always beat you at this, always. They can afford to pay far more people than you have volunteering for you, ever. There is no justification for Mozilla's extension policy. Mozilla is just LARPing as Google. They are superficially copying some features of Google's platform, in the hopes that they will magically inherit Google's success. Microsoft still sells their software in boxes in retails stores. Perhaps Mozilla should spend money pressing discs, but instead of selling it, they should give away Firefox discs in stores. That's a good analogue to what Mozilla is doing. This is a colossal waste of time that nobody asked for and nobody wants.