390657 - Add language pack as a type in first step of developer panel

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(addons.mozilla.org Graveyard :: Developer Pages, defect)

Description

[Michael Morgan [:morgamic]]

Add ability to submit add-ons as type language pack so they are marked with the correct type from when they are submitted.

Comment 1

[Michael Morgan [:morgamic]]

What are the differences between a language pack physically from an add-on?  If there are no differences, then this might not be necessary -- if it's still an .xpi, but just a hard-coded category?  Thoughts?

Comment 2

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

A language pack is a subset of an add-on:  It can only be string translations.

Since they don't have executable code in them, we can push them through the approval queue without as many security risks.  I think Axel has an app (or at least a set of rules) for validating a language pack.

As far as this bug - I think we just want a way to identify an add-on as a language pack or not.  Using a category seems like it's overloading the category type to me - what do you think of adding a flag for it, similar to "site specific" or "requires external software"?

Comment 3

[Justin Scott [:fligtar]]

We already have two add-on-types setup for language packs: Language Pack (Application) and Language Pack (Add-on).

Adding them to the list in the first step of additem wouldn't be hard... they just wouldn't show up anywhere because we don't have an LP display page.

Comment 4

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

Adding Axel to the CC.  Axel: can you give specific details about what comprises a language pack for Firefox?

Comment 5

[Axel Hecht [:Pike]]

The language packs only have the dtds and .properties in them, plus the in-product help (xhtml and rdf/xml files), intl.css, and builtinURLs.rdf (which I think isn't used anymore).

They don't contain any searches nor bookmarks nor prefs. At least if they did contain prefs, I'm giving them an r-. The bug about my proposed langpack review policy is bug 391705, btw.

Comment 6

[Justin Scott [:fligtar]]

Axel, could you link me to some existing valid language packs? Just want to be sure I'm testing with the right thing.

Comment 7

[Sebastian Hengst [:aryx] (needinfo me if it's about an intermittent or backout)]

http://ftp-mozilla.netscape.com/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/2.0.0.11/win32/xpi/ should be valid ones.

Comment 8

[Axel Hecht [:Pike]]

Actually, http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html#lang_packs has links to the ones we found recently on AMO.

Comment 9

[Justin Scott [:fligtar]]

Attachment: patch

This is all that's required to add Language Packs to the Developer Control Panel. Although Axel confirmed that language packs should all have type:8 in the install.rdf, I didn't setup autodetection because there will be so few langpack submissions and I would have to redo quite a bit of code, which I would rather wait until I do the Dev CP revamp in a few months.

So, to submit a langpack, someone just has to either select that it's a language pack, or let it auto detect as an extension and then say it's incorrect and that it's a langpack.

However, I don't think we should commit this patch until the public side(s) of this bug are fixed. All of the public side stuff is coded to only work for certain extension types. So langpacks don't show in search results and if you type the add-on ID to view the display page, it says add-on not found.

Comment 10

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

Does AMO already validate that a language pack is a language pack (eg. no js files in it)?

Also, I agree that we shouldn't give people the option until langpacks are visible on the public side.

Comment 11

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

Comment on attachment 292982 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

We could add the "no javascript" checks with bug 412095

Comment 12

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

Currently when language packs are uploaded, they are marked as extensions and are still available.  An admin can manually mark the extension as a language pack and make it available on the language tools page.  Since the basic functionality is still available (you can download/update the add-on) I'm targeting this for the dev tools redesign in v3.5.

Comment 13

[Justin Scott [:fligtar]]

I'm wondering if we should take this now since people are having issues updating their language packs.

Comment 14

[Basil Hashem [:baz]]

Yes, let's take it as part of 3.5

Comment 15

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

(In reply to comment #14)
> Yes, let's take it as part of 3.5
> 

I'd like to commit this fix asap due to people having troubles updating their language packs.  The problems mentioned in the last paragraph of comment #9 are fixed so I don't see a reason not to add this.

Comment 16

[Justin Scott [:fligtar]]

This is causing a lot of problems, so I checked in the patch for 3.4.5. People should be able to update their language packs after this is live. There is still some prettiness that can be done around langpacks but that will be done in 3.5.

Comment 17

[Samuel Sidler (old account; do not CC)]

Using https://preview.addons.mozilla.org/...

When attempting upload a Language Pack, I see the Language Pack option and, if selected, it works fine. The appropriate fields and everything.

However, if I let AMO decide which type my add-on is, it detects it as an extension, as comment 9 says.

VERIFIED.

Comment 18

[Justin Scott [:fligtar]]

3.4.5 was pushed on Friday.