<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 19/03/2019 17:15, Onno Ekker wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:96285113-3f5b-c4b5-22f4-f9fdb8e5d6ab@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I think it's bad user experience if you have an add-on that stops
working and have to go looking for an alternative. If the add-on is
simply a continuation (or the only continuation) of an abandoned add-on,
the user should have an automatic update path.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Personally I'd not want to see an automatic upgrade as I think it
could be confusing to users if the author of their addon changes
unexpectedly. But I take the point about providing a smooth upgrade
path when an addon has been abandoned (leaving aside, for the
moment, definitions of "abandoned").<br>
<br>
One way of doing this might be as follows:<br>
(1) Allow either addon authors and/or reviewers to mark an addon as
being a possible upgrade path for one or more pre-existing addons.<br>
(2) This information would be exposed to end users in ATO.<br>
(3) And this information would also be exposed to users from within
Thunderbird, allowing them to select a new author's replacement
addon. If this approach was taken then clearly it would need to be
decided how and when to show this information to users.<br>
<br>
Yes, I know that what I am proposing would need new developments
with ATO, new developments in Thunderbird, and probably (a little)
more work for reviewers. But it's an idea that could perhaps improve
user experience when it comes to the unavoidable reality of
abandoned addons.<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mark Rousell
</pre>
</body>
</html>