Signing a self hosted version while awaiting listing review

Add-ons addons.mozilla.org
#1

Hi

We currently have an unsigned self hosted add-on but have submitted it to AMO for listing (6 weeks ago) and it is currently still in the Full Review queue. However it doesn’t look like it’s going to make it out of the queue by the time Firefox 41 is released (it’s taken 6 weeks to move 100 places and we still have 180 places to go and there is no guarantee we will pass Full Review first time round) at which point our users will not be able to install the self hosted version unless that is signed (or they disable signature enforcement - which I doubt most will). Our users are already getting the warning now with Firefox 40 out.

However I’ve tried submitting our current version for unlisted signing but it fails with “Duplicate UUID found” (all other automated validation checks pass). I’m guessing I could delete the listed version and then get the unlisted one signed but is there any way to sign our current version without losing our place in the Full Review queue?

Thanks

#2

No, it’s not possible for an add-on to have listed and unlisted versions at the same time. I suggest you stay put for your listed submission, since we will be scaling up or reviewing efforts in the coming weeks, and we expect to bring the queues back to normal.

#3

Make an add-on with another ID and upload it for signing.

#4

Andrey, doesn’t this mean though that we’ll effectively have 2 add-ons? Users who install the one with the new ID will never be able to upgrade to the Listed one (once it is listed) and receive updates. So then we’d need to have some migration plan to get everyone back on the same add-on or forever maintain 2 versions (listed and unlisted).

This doesn’t seem like a viable solution.

#5

Why not? You’ll have two independent update channels - one for unlisted (serving updates from your server) and another one is AMO.

AMO has several problems and the main is that your listed add-on will be always outdated. Having an independent add-on and update channel can help if you need to patch it quickly.

#6

Hi. Just to help clarify, all addons will be going through AMO, listed or unlisted. While they do have separate queues, both are currently backed up, but majorly improving. They will both be further majorly improving in the coming weeks as they bring on more volunteers and hires. Unlisted addons will either be automatically reviewed and passed, or be bumped to an administrative review. Given that only admins can review them, and that admins are also the only people who can review any addon which uses binary or obfuscated code, you will not see any faster timing on unlisted addons.

#7

We use this way: listed and unlisted with it’s own update channel. Our unlisted add-on always goes to manual review and it takes 2-4 days (thanks to Andreas), while listed one is 9 months in the queue and it’s still there no change.

#8

As @TheOne would tell you, and as I said above, the listed queue is backed up but improving.

#9

@arenlor, no problem, I want to believe that situation will change. I have recently applied for reviewer status to help with this.

But you see, @snow asks for a quick solution and I don’t see anything better than making a separate unlisted add-on.

#10

@avatar I’m confused and maybe I’m missing something.

But as I understand it, if someone has installed the Add-On ID ‘xyz’ which is listed on AMO and you have an unlisted version of the same Add-On with ID ‘abc’ and you release an updated version of ‘abc’, the user running ‘xyz’ will not get that update.

So what’s the point then of running 2 add-ons. It only makes sense if you have beta users running the unlisted version and release users running the listed version.

#11

Generally speaking you’re right about beta and release versions.

I am just talking about this:

Until listed version is reviewed you can offer users beta version instead.

#12

Right, I understand now. I think the problem with that though is that there is no easy migration path to get them onto the listed version apart from asking them to manually uninstall the unlisted version and install the listed version or indefinitely maintain two versions of the Add-On in which case you may as well not list at all.