Beta add-on support on ATN - asking for a reminder

Andrei Hajdukewycz sancus at
Fri Aug 14 22:27:59 UTC 2020

On 8/14/2020 3:09 PM, Eyal Rozenberg wrote:
> Andrei, you haven't really answered my question. Is it:
> 1. The AMO codebase proper (olympia),
> 2. a fork,
> 3. or an independent codebase?
> In case (1.), we should just pressure the "Olympia" developers to 
> (re)-introduce the feature, because we need it.
> In cases (2.), (3.) - where is the issue tracker for the ATN source? 
> We need to move from having "no plans" for this feature to planning 
> its reintroduction. It's important... and it will be important for the 
> next release(s) as well. Even the most rudimentary support for this - 
> i.e. a well-placed box with a link to where betas are available 
> off-site - would already improve things. So it's not a dichotomy 
> between "a huge project" and "doing nothing".

I did answer your question, it's not happening, and I gave you an 
alternative. That's the last word I'll be saying on the matter.

ATN is a fork of addons-server on a fairly old revision 
<>. We do make some 
effort to be able to take updates from upstream, but it is difficult 
because we maintain support for legacy add-ons which are long dead to 
Firefox. Things will hopefully improve once we can move past that, but 
front-end work is needed as well. I doubt the AMO team cares to 
introduce any sort of beta function as there's no real point to it with 
the state of Web Extensions on Firefox. Even if they did, it would be a 
long time before we'd be able to take any of those patches.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list