
Why is Bookmark Favicon Changer missing from the add-ons list?
The Bookmark Favicon Changer add-on is currently installed on my browser [ESR 31.2.0] and it seems to work, although imperfectly. Yet the add-on pages (https://addons.mozilla.org/) do not list it at all, as far as I can see. What's going on?
Chosen solution
Yes, AMO means addons.mozilla.org. No, it's an unofficial acronym, just as SUMO is for SUpport.MOzilla.org.
Read this answer in context 👍 1All Replies (6)
My guess is that it was pulled from AMO by the developer of that extension, because it was broken by a Firefox update and the developer didn't want to deal with fixing it any longer.
My advice is to look for an alternative replacement for the one you have.
See:
The Developer has abandoned the add-on because of Bug 834457. I'm sure someone out there can get this add-on working again.
Bug 834457 - Remove deprecated synchronous APIs from Places
Modified
Is this supposed to happen? If an add-on is withdrawn, is there no mechanism to notify its users?
The developer was flaunting the rules that AMO operates under. AMO cut him some slack, and provided a month warning about uploading an updated version. Then that extension was downgraded, and after warning the developer again and not getting a response from the developer Mozilla disabled the listing for that extension. All he had to do was to upload a new "fixed" version to have that extension enabled again.
Fair or unfair, the rules are the rules. Violate the rules and you're liable to be tossed out. I use 6 different extensions that aren't hosted at AMO; two were pulled from AMO years ago due to "new rules" similar to what this developer didn't like and the other 4 were never hosted at AMO for one reason of another. And at least Mozilla doesn't do like some of the App stores and restrict add-ons to being installed only from the Mozilla Add-ons website or Market Place as will soon be known. Add-on developers still have the choice to host add-ons on their own website, and users still have the choice to install add-ons from any website that they want to.
As far as "notification" goes - why would Mozilla want to do that? Mozilla didn't like a "call" the developer was using, so why should Mozilla contact users? And how would Mozilla even go about contacting users? There's no "registry" of users for each extension that is kept by Mozilla, and IMO keeping track users like that would violate each users privacy. Who wants to be tracked in that manner?
Edmeister, your answer was enlightening. I agree with your point about notification, but I wouldn't expect individual notices to be transmitted to users. I'm just surprised that the withdrawn add-on is still listed by Mozilla as one of my add-ons. With my limited knowledge of the processes involved, I would have expected that in some way I would be able to learn of the add-on's changed status without having to find that it's no longer listed on addons.mozilla.org. But maybe that's not feasible.
I'm guessing that AMO means addons.mozilla.org. Is that correct? What about IMO? Is there a Mozilla page that defines these acronyms? (The Acronym Finder site does not define either one—I'll probably suggest it add them, once I find out what they both mean!)
Chosen Solution
Yes, AMO means addons.mozilla.org. No, it's an unofficial acronym, just as SUMO is for SUpport.MOzilla.org.