State of Thunderbird Extensions

Geoff Lankow geoff at
Mon Apr 1 07:51:44 UTC 2019

Here's an example 
<> of 
one that's compatible with 65+ (although not with 67+ because that's 
awaiting review).

AIUI the most-recently uploaded version is the one that's shown. That's 
frustrating because in this case it's not what most people would want, 
assuming they used their browser to find it, which is a fairly good 
assumption. But it is clearly marked with compatibility information and 
links to other versions so not quite so bad.

I have talked about having a setting in ATN for "the most recent TB 
release version" and by default displaying the add-on version compatible 
with it, but that hasn't happened yet. I'll look into it some more 
because it isn't as easy as it sounds.


On 1/04/19 20:37, Jörg Knobloch wrote:
> On 01 Apr 2019 09:31, Geoff Lankow wrote:
>> Third, to Jörg, if there are updated add-ons that haven't been 
>> uploaded yet, why? Is something discouraging authors updating, that 
>> we can fix?
> Well, in my case, ignorance, and yes, that can be fixed. Formerly, 
> uploading a new version obscured the old version compatible with TB 
> 60, and authors didn't want that. I understand that you have fixed 
> that, but I'm still unclear about the mechanics. What do ATN visitors 
> see? What do they download manually? Is it hard to get to the 
> TB-60-compatible version?
> Maybe we can explore this if you point us to an example.
> Also, if and add-on was made compatible with - say - TB 66, there is 
> no guarantee that it's still compatible with TB 68, so authors might 
> just wait until TB 68 beta ships in May.
> Jörg.
> _______________________________________________
> tb-planning mailing list
> tb-planning at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list