Schedule for incrementing allowed AMO updates

Mark Banner mbanner at
Tue Jun 21 21:12:15 UTC 2011

On 21/06/2011 19:48, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2011-06-16 5:02 AM, Mark Banner wrote:
>> Even with automatic updates, I believe we won't be automatically
>> updating a user if their extensions are incompatible. If you've seen
>> something to the contrary, please let me know.
> Fyi, I just had a user call that they were being prompted for an
> automatic update to Firefox 5, but at least they were warned that it
> would result in disabled extensions...
That sounds like the behaviour I'd expect (currently at least) - the 
update didn't happen in the background, they were prompted first due to 
the extensions not being compatible.
> This is really going to become a major pain really quick...
I don't understand what the pain point is here. The only real difference 
that I see is that they wouldn't have got the major update dialog first.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4007 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list