Very long extension moderation process

[tnowak]

tnowak Opera @Guest last edited by tnowak

@adsfactory-russia: It's OK, but don't mix languages in different fields.
I see that you are discussing the rest of issues with our moderation team.

[A Former User]

A Former User @tnowak last edited by

@tnowak Thanks for the answer. Our technicians corrected all the points indicated by the moderators and we uploaded the new version. I hope the moderators can find a little time and re-check the corrections

[A Former User]

A Former User last edited by

Hi! We've been waiting for moderation since 2017. It there a way to find out what's the problem with it?

[kurtq]

kurtq @tnowak last edited by

@tnowak Thank! I downloaded the new version, the jQuery library was updated to the latest version, minor bugs were fixed. I hope that moderation will happen anyway

[oktools]

oktools last edited by

Hi. Why is my extension published for so long? The previous version has stopped working. Many corrections have been made. Users complain.
Enabled option "I want my extension to be available for auto-publishing."

package/21805
OkTools - v4.2.3 was submitted. Awaiting moderation.
oktools; Jun 7, 2019 8:46:32 PM UTC

[A Former User]

A Former User @tnowak last edited by

@tnowak You can say that with package/198615?

[tnowak]

tnowak Opera @Guest last edited by

@commaticus : Let's start with:

• "There must be no unused files."
• "Well-known third-party libraries must be in a genuine and in an unchanged form. They should be acquired from the vendor’s official website or a CDN."

[kurtq]

kurtq last edited by

Hello! Today version 1.7.7.2 was checked and rejected, all corrections according to your recommendations were made in the updated version 1.7.7.3. Please check 1.7.7.3, thanks

[tnowak]

tnowak Opera @kurtq last edited by

@kurtq : That's why the old version was rejected
And the review of the newest version is in progress.

[A Former User]

A Former User @tnowak last edited by

@tnowak
"There must be no unused files." - It seems there are no unused files.
"Well-known third-party libraries must be in a genuine and in an unchanged form. They should be acquired from the vendor’s official website or a CDN." - we use two libraries - jquery and D3js. They in a genuine and in an unchanged form. And they acquired from the official website.

[A Former User]

A Former User last edited by

Hey guys, we submitted our add-on on the 8th of Oct, 2018. Is there a way to speed up the moderation process?

[oktools]

oktools last edited by

Please post the extension. Made all the corrections indicated by the moderators.

package/21805
OkTools - v4.3 was submitted. Awaiting moderation.
oktools; Aug 22, 2019 12:35:01 PM UTC

[tnowak]

tnowak Opera @oktools last edited by

@oktools : We asked you to update links in the description to use HTTPS.

[tnowak]

tnowak Opera @Guest last edited by

@signalhire : Your extension contains obfuscated or minified scripts.
Please take a look at https://dev.opera.com/extensions/acceptance-criteria/

[phaistonian]

phaistonian last edited by

@tnowak Could you please take a look at package/233927 ?

Been trying to get this online for almost a year now

ps: Implemented what you suggested a while back.

[oktools]

oktools @tnowak last edited by

@tnowak Replaced absolutely all links from http to https in the extension and on the addons.opera.com page.

[tnowak]

tnowak Opera @oktools last edited by

@oktools : Thanks!

[A Former User]

A Former User @tnowak last edited by

@tnowak could you answer my question?
@commaticus said in Very long extension moderation process:

@tnowak
"There must be no unused files." - It seems there are no unused files.
"Well-known third-party libraries must be in a genuine and in an unchanged form. They should be acquired from the vendor’s official website or a CDN." - we use two libraries - jquery and D3js. They in a genuine and in an unchanged form. And they acquired from the official website.

[burnout426]

burnout426 Volunteer @tnowak last edited by

@tnowak said in Very long extension moderation process:

"Well-known third-party libraries must be in a genuine and in an unchanged form. They should be acquired from the vendor’s official website or a CDN."

How is the check done? SHA-256 hash comparison between the included file and the file for the latest version of the library?

Was just wondering how @commaticus could check before-hand just to make sure the system will be happy.

[tnowak]

tnowak Opera @Guest last edited by

@commaticus

1. Unused files in the last package you submitted:

    → find -type f -size 0
    ./site/removelisting.js
    ./noconcat/1_sth/obj.js
    ./all/script.js
   

2. Could you please provide links to these files on the official websites? I can only find ones with a comment containing the version number on the first line.

@burnout426
Libraries need to be byte for byte exact copies, so SHA-256 hash comparison can be used to check that.