Before we embark on significant work to enhance and drive the site forward, we should stop to consider what direction the site itself will take through the next year.
- Performance and scaling
- This will be addressed on the public-facing elements of the site by reimplementing using the Smarty PHP templating engine and a PHP accelerator to aid caching and flexibility (ETA: mid/end Jan)
- Review/approval backlog
- There are ~150 extensions that haven't been updated during last year. How to keep on track if extension/theme is still developed and what do with extensions that are discontinued? Also see enhancement bug 320124 Display notice in Extension/Theme Manager if development of extension or theme is discontinued
Site Managment options
- Editorial standard is "works and plays nice"
- All extensions are tested and reviewed on all supported platforms before availability
- Unpredictable quality/polish/level of user experience
- Review queue simply doesn't scale without dedicated staff, leading to large backlogs and long delays in publishing updates (even simple version bumps)
Option #1: Separate finished from in-progress extensions
- Addons at v1.0 and higher are subject to a full QA/evaluation process that rates the addon against Mozilla release standards. This is intentionally a high bar, and a longer process, but should result in a subset of high quality extensions that we expose by default.
- Addons versioned < 1 are not shown on the main site, but are available via a second site backed by the same backend instance. These are then not subject to testing, and an admin can simply review the submission and approve it for the site.
- Some addons may be versioned > 1 and not meet our quality standards. Possibly ignore version and have the author flag for official sanctioning of some sort?
- If and when we get signing etc working does this get added to the process for the main (vetted) site?
Option #2: Only support/host release-quality extensions
- Addons are held to the release quality standard as in #1
- Extensions not meeting this standard can host elsewhere
- Less community building, more focus on testing and (effectively) certifying a smaller set of extensions
- Pushes new innovations outside of mozilla.org
In either case, what happens to an addon when it is no longer maintained by the author? How would it be decertified? -Tsee