19
edits
(Added Addons.Mozilla.Org heading, for suggestions to that site) |
|||
| Line 89: | Line 89: | ||
: It's planned to have developers able to specify an EULA, and also for them to be able to use html in the developer notes about the add-on, so they could link to their source code there - is that enough? [[User:Cameron|Cameron]] 08:02, 24 August 2006 (PDT) | : It's planned to have developers able to specify an EULA, and also for them to be able to use html in the developer notes about the add-on, so they could link to their source code there - is that enough? [[User:Cameron|Cameron]] 08:02, 24 August 2006 (PDT) | ||
= Addons.Mozilla.Org = | = Addons.Mozilla.Org - improving extension Searches = | ||
In my opinion, AMO is in need of an overhaul. There are so many good extensions out there, but finding them on AMO is difficult - for a number of reasons. A number of individual Bugs have long-been filed suggesting improvements for the site, but until the problem is attacked from a 'big picture' perspective, I don't foresee the site reaching its full potential. I filed [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=349430/ Bug 349430] to address the issue, and listed the 3 major problem areas and some considerations that need to be met in order to make AMO a user-friendly site. [[User:RenegadeX|RenegadeX]] 21:16, 25 August 2006 (PDT) | In my opinion, AMO is in need of an overhaul. There are so many good extensions out there, but finding them on AMO is difficult - for a number of reasons. A number of individual Bugs have long-been filed suggesting improvements for the site, but until the problem is attacked from a 'big picture' perspective, I don't foresee the site reaching its full potential. I filed [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=349430/ Bug 349430] to address the issue, and listed the 3 major problem areas and some considerations that need to be met in order to make AMO a user-friendly site. [[User:RenegadeX|RenegadeX]] 21:16, 25 August 2006 (PDT) | ||
edits