273574 - we would like our plugin, SwiftView, to be listed on Firefox's plugin finder service

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(addons.mozilla.org Graveyard :: Plugins, enhancement)

Description

[Steve S]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041107 Firefox/1.0
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041107 Firefox/1.0

we have offered a plugin since NS 4 for viewing PCL, HPGL, TIFF and other
formats.  A complete list is here:
http://www.swiftview.com/tech/techfaq.htm#FileFormats.  We'd like to be on the
Firefox plugin finder.


Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Go to http://swiftview.com/tech/svm_installer.htm
2. Click plug-in finder.


Actual Results:  
No plugin found.

Expected Results:  
Find SwiftView plugin.

Comment 1

[Steve Schmitt]

[e-mail] wrote:
> These were apparently on hold while we develop a policy on hosting
> plugins. The initial batch were just a few big-name plugin vendors with
> whom we signed contracts. Since there's no way to inspect the source
> code, unlike extensions, plugins from untrusted sources pose more risk
> and we haven't figured out how to safely generalize the process.

I understand your concern, you need to be able to discern legitimate businesses from spyware bozos.

I would like to propose a standard for vetting plugin vendors that has four parts. You may think this is too strict, or you may wish to add additional requirements.

1) Have a verifiable company headquarters with a physical address.

Ours is
SwiftView, Inc.
15605 SW 72nd Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97224
971-223-2600

2) Provide references at three companies which use the plugin.

We have major companies that use our plugin such as Pratt and Whitney, SuperValu, and Paychex. For references, please contact our sales manager, Kathy Cash, [e-mail] or 971-223-2628.

3) Show a documented history of offering a plugin for five years or more.

Our plugin was first released in April of 1997. Records on the net only go back to 1998, but that documents us having provided a plugin for eight years:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.swiftview.com

4) Provide a letter on company letterhead that states that the plugin only does what we publically state it does.

Available upon request.


Do you think any or all these would be sufficient proof to allow us into the plugin finder list? Are there additional requirements that should be met?

Comment 2

[Daniel Mota Leite]

I think this bug needs updating...

there should be public rules how to add extra plugins, IE have the activeX install that opens the door to all those spy/adware, firefox to escape this trap should use as its major source of plugins its own plugins finder... if not, ignorant people will install anything that might popup from the page and they for sure dont know on who to trust

the sooner the plugins publish rules are release, more likely a plugin builder will release a firefox plugin and request the inclusion. if there is none, they will think that firefox is too small and too much a toy to release one

so please, the mozilla.org should discuss and agree to a set of basic rules and publish it... waiting for the user to install anything on his own is just asking for trouble

also, this bug should be made more global,ie: rules about adding plugins to mozilla server, OS=all

thanks

Comment 3

[alanjstr]

jst -
Is there something blocking this?

Comment 4

[Mike Shaver (:shaver emeritus)]

I hear that PFS is my problem now...

Comment 5

[Mike Shaver (:shaver emeritus)]

We're generally not looking to add new plugins to the PFS, with exceptions for very popular and widely-used plugins made on a case-by-case basis (and quite conservatively).

Sorry for the confusion and extreme delay.