On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 20:04:55 -0500
Ron Hunter <
rphunter@...> wrote:
> On 7/2/2012 6:27 PM,
F1Com@... wrote:
> > I like this part:
> >
> > (taken from) Mozilla Add-on Policies (Draft) **
> >
> > * Be Fast *
> >
> > * Add-ons must not cause hangs or crashes.
> > * Add-ons should not consume excessive amounts of memory or cause
> > memory leaks.
> > * Add-ons should not slow the application down
> >
> > In a perfect world... ;-)
>
> I take issue with the third statement. It depends on what you expect
> the add-on to DO. Nothing is free.
IMO, add-ons that are going to be activated for most surfing should
make every effort to be speedy. Ones that do a lot more but aren't
used all the time, like Firebug, need a mechanism to toggle them off
easily. (And FWIW, Firebug is off by default and is easy to toggle off
if it's activated.) But that's probably too much to put in a bullet
list policy statement.
In the end, I hope they won't wind up rejecting add-ons for slowing
things down. If they deem an add-on too slow, ISTM a warning about
that on its AMO page wouldn't hurt; at least that way users would be
less likely to be confused when they find slowness that wasn't there
before.
F1Com, if you see this quoted, could you link to that draft please?
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general@...
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
