1177082 - Update for unlisted add-on - automatically signing is promised, but "awaiting review" in the end

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1184008

(addons.mozilla.org Graveyard :: Add-on Validation, defect)

Description

[Kwizzu]

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/43.0.2357.130 Safari/537.36

Steps to reproduce:

1. There was the addon listed https://addons.mozilla.org/ru/developers/addon/fastesttube/ in the review queue.
2. I believe that it will be not reviewed till August, so I make it unlisted and upload the new version 2.2.10.1.
3. The validator say "all ok, the add-on will be automatically signed".



Actual results:

After submitting the version I see that it's status is "awaiting full review". But I don't request this and I was promised that the version will be signed automatically.


Expected results:

Two cases
1. If there are no strange things in the code (the validator found nothing critical, right?) - the add-on should be signed automatically as promised.
2. If there is some strange things in the code I want to see warning looks like "Manual review needed" and checkbox like "Yes, I want manual review". I.e. I want a choice: fix the found strange thing to make validator happy (and get auto signing in the few seconds) or request the manual review (and lose some time on waiting for it).

Comment 1

[Jorge Villalobos [:jorgev] (he/him)]

I'm not sure if this has to do with the attached sources, which automatically admin-flag the add-on, or if the validation results aren't right. I don't see any "signing severity" messages, so in theory this add-on should have passed automatic validation.

Comment 2

[Emiliano Heyns]

I'm experiencing the same problem when submitting zotero-better-bibtex. I have some warnings in my validation report, but none that mention anything about signing (and none that should IMO)

Comment 3

[Emiliano Heyns]

I currently have my extension down to 0 warnings (yay, I guess), and the validator cheerfully announces "Your add-on was validated with no errors or warnings. Your submission passed validation and will be automatically signed." Yet I am forced to choose between Prelim or full review before I can complete the process, and the status just changes to "Awaiting Prelim/Full review" rather than being signed.

Comment 4

[Kwizzu]

(In reply to Jorge Villalobos [:jorgev] from comment #1)
> I'm not sure if this has to do with the attached sources
Jorge, could you please clarify for future reference, should we attach sources at all for the case of unlisted add-on and no "signing severity" warnings from validator?

Comment 5

[Jorge Villalobos [:jorgev] (he/him)]

(In reply to Kwizzu from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jorge Villalobos [:jorgev] from comment #1)
> > I'm not sure if this has to do with the attached sources
> Jorge, could you please clarify for future reference, should we attach
> sources at all for the case of unlisted add-on and no "signing severity"
> warnings from validator?

No, you should only attach sources if your add-on has minified/obfuscated/binary code AND you need to go through manual review.

Comment 6

[Emiliano Heyns]

this doesn't apply to "better bibtex" anymore; no minified/obfuscated/binary code, zero warnings/errors on validation, still forced to manual review.

Comment 7

[Kwizzu]

Is any chance that the add-ons, affected by this bug will be manually forced to sign to override the bug? FastestTube is still in the review queue more than week, although there are no any "signing severity" warnings for it. It's frustrating :(

Or may be someone can confirm that if I will upload the new version and will not attach the zip with the sources, the signing will be made automatically? I'm afraid to try this myself because it will be awful to loose the queue position (the queue шы very-very slow).

Comment 8

[Mathieu Agopian [:magopian]]

Can you please attach the version(s) you tried to upload to this bug, so I can try reproducing the issue?

Comment 9

[Kwizzu]

Attachment: Original (unsigned) xpi

(In reply to Mathieu Agopian [:magopian] from comment #8)
> Can you please attach the version(s) you tried to upload to this bug, so I
> can try reproducing the issue?
The original (unsigned) XPI is attached.
When uploading, I additionally attached unminified source as a zip file. Unfortunately, I can't post this sources in public (but I think, the content of this zip should not matter in context of this issue).


The links to the version on AMO (it's already reviewed and signed): https://addons.mozilla.org/ru/developers/addon/fastesttube/versions/1712938

Comment 10

[Julie]

I appear to have the same issue. I have unlisted my addon, but when I submitted the latest version, it is now 'Awaiting Full Review':

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/developers/addon/total-validator/versions/1722416

We are about to release a new version of our application which works in tandem with this addon, so we need this signed quickly.

Comment 11

[Mathieu Agopian [:magopian]]

I believe this bug is a duplicate of bug 1184008

See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1184008#c7 for an explanation of the issue. If you are not in this case (a fully reviewed add-on that was switched to unlisted), please reopen this bug.

Comment 12

[Kwizzu]

(In reply to Mathieu Agopian [:magopian] from comment #11)
> If you are not in this case (a fully reviewed
> add-on that was switched to unlisted), please reopen this bug.
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1184008 ***

My addon (FastestTube) never was fully reviewed, it just waited in full review queue for months. After this it was switched to the unlisted. I don't know, if "awaiting full review" and "fully reviewed" are the same for this case, so I reopening the issue.

Comment 13

[Kwizzu]

And another detail - FastestTube never required side-loading as mentioned in bug 1184008

Comment 14

[Mathieu Agopian [:magopian]]

Hi Kwizzu,

Waiting for a full review or being fully reviewed, in this specific case, results in the same state.

We need to better document what "side loading" means. A fully reviewed add-on can be side-loaded, and to be side-loaded, an add-on needs to be fully reviewed.

When submitting an unlisted add-on, there's an extra checkbox to allow side-loading, which only selects the type of review (full in this case). When asking for a full review, it will always result in a manual review, whether the add-on is listed, unlisted, with or without (signing related) warnings.