Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

AMO flagged extension again #50

Closed
cadorn opened this issue Oct 5, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

AMO flagged extension again #50

cadorn opened this issue Oct 5, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@cadorn
Copy link
Member

cadorn commented Oct 5, 2019

Please respond to the following requests:

  1. This version contains minified, concatenated or otherwise machine-generated code. Please provide the original sources, together with instructions on how to generate the final XPI. Source code must be provided as an archive and uploaded using the source code upload field, which can be done during submission or on the version page in the developer hub.

Please read through the instructions at https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/Source_Code_Submission.

scripts/background.js line 11
scripts/devtools/dist/insight.rep.js line 11, 14

  1. Your add-on includes a third-party library. Please provide a list with the origin of the exact library version you were using and make sure you are using an exact copy of the original maintainers release version. For more information, refer to https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/Third_Party_Library_Usage .
@cadorn
Copy link
Member Author

cadorn commented Oct 5, 2019

My Reply:

Instead of uploading a source code archive, will links to online source repositories suffice?

Build instructions are here: https://github.com/firephp/firephp-for-browser-devtools#source

Reviewer notes are here: https://github.com/firephp/firephp-for-browser-devtools#notes-for-build-reviewers

When building this extension from source now, the generated files will be slightly different from the ones uploaded to AMO originally due to changes in the build tools since then. I will have to upload another build with the latest frozen versions of the build tools if that is an issue.

The reviewer notes include links to all third party libraries. These libraries are included at various build tool layers by copying files from npm published packages. Does the provided information satisfy the third party lib requirement or do I actually need to specify the source links at exact versions for all included libraries?

@cadorn
Copy link
Member Author

cadorn commented Jul 1, 2020

See: #57

@cadorn cadorn closed this as completed Jul 1, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant