427180 - Shouldn't show Experimental add-ons in the Recommended list / category landing page?

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(addons.mozilla.org Graveyard :: Public Pages, enhancement)

Description

[Stephen Donner [:stephend] Not actively reading bugmail]

Summary: Shouldn't show Experimental add-ons in the Recommended list / category landing page?

Using Firefox 2.0.0.13, loading https://preview.addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browse/type:1/cat:72 features "8aweek" as a Recommended add-on, but I thought we decided to not show Experimental add-ons in the Recommended list?

Comment 1

[Basil Hashem [:baz]]

That is the right policy, I've removed 8aweek since I didn't realize it was sandbox'ed.

Morphing this to Feature Manager which should not allow sandbox'ed items to be added to the Feature Manager (either Admin or Editor)

Comment 2

[Dave Garrett]

Is there a particular reason why this bug still hasn't been dealt with?  The link in comment #0 above shows for me right now two well known extensions and three experimentals.  Only one has a review (only 3 stars, at that) and one has NEVER been downloaded.  (#2 has 14 total downloads and #3 has 151)  Only add-ons good enough to get at least one or two reviews, at least a few more downloads than this, and acceptance to public status should be featured here.  If there really is an extension good enough to jump to the front of the pack, then give it a quick review and public status first.  I'm sorry, but the way it is now just makes AMO look bad.

If I click on a category I should be shown a good selection of add-ons I might want (within my locale) and not suggestions of sandboxed items to test.  If we really do want to list a few sandboxed add-ons here, they should be made much smaller and probably require a login to see.

Could someone please consider this for 3.4.2?

Comment 3

[Basil Hashem [:baz]]

Dave, comment 0 was actually a problem with the top two slots where I had inadvertently made 8aweek a recommended add-on using the administrator's Feature Manager. So, then I changed this bug to be a change request for the Feature Manager

So, I've morphed this bug into the public page component and I agree, we are starving out great public add-ons and showcasing experimental ones. I think we should tweak the algorithm that is used to select the 3 slots on the category landing pages so that we only show public add-ons. Nominating for 3.4.2 consideration.

I've also spawned bug 432232 for making changes to the Feature Manager.

Comment 4

[Fred Wenzel [:wenzel]]

Yeah, currently the three small slots on the landing page are filled by completely random add-ons by design (with the consideration that experimental add-ons may deserve some public attention too to give them more a chance to leave the sandbox). However, I can understand the reasoning that perfectly fine public add-ons may suffer from a bunch of experimental (possibly even quite bogus) add-ons being cycled through the landing page.

Therefore, I am fine with changing the random selection to "random but public".

Comment 5

[Dave Garrett]

(In reply to comment #4)
> Therefore, I am fine with changing the random selection to "random but public".
> 

How about random, but biased towards higher popularity add-ons in the current category?

Along these lines, I filed bug 425800 as a suggestion a bit back.  The more we can filter by the community's selections the easier it'll be for people to find what they're looking for.

Comment 6

[Michael Morgan [:morgamic]]

Attachment: v1, whitelists only STATUS_PUBLIC add-ons for landing pages

Comment 7

[Michael Morgan [:morgamic]]

r13053

Comment 8

[Stephen Donner [:stephend] Not actively reading bugmail]

Verified FIXED; checked Firefox, SeaMonkey, Sunbird, and Thunderbird views (don't think I missed any; holler if so).