User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_2; en-US) AppleWebKit/532.5 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/188.8.131.52 Safari/532.5 Build Identifier: In the AMO developer pages, the extension developer can set firefox version compatibility for their extensions. Firefox version 3.0.11 is not an option there. I maintain an extension that was affected by a bug in Firefox versions 3.0.5-3.0.10 and would like to set minimum compatibility to 3.0.11 Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Go to Addons.mozilla.org website 2. Log in and use developer tools 3. Try to change version compatibility for a maintained extension in "files and versions" Actual Results: 3.0.11 is not in the list, though 3.0.9 and below are Expected Results: 3.0.11 will be in the list
Is there a bug number for the issue that was fixed? Also, is there a corresponding 3.5.x version that should be added, or did this bug only affect 3.0.x?
Summary: Selecting Firefox version 3.0.11 for extension compatibility on AMO → Add Firefox 3.0.11 to AMO valid versions list
The issue was https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=406646 The bug only affected 3.0.x
Seems like a valid request to me. 3.0.9 was also added at the request of an extension developer who wanted it (bug 491169).
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
There's a big difference between the circumstances of that bug and this one: when 3.0.9 was added, Firefox 3.0.x was still the current release. Now, no users should be using a version that old with public security vulnerabilities. Will think about this on Monday.
True, but an extension's version range isn't really related to that. We don't exactly block out-of-date users from installing or updating extensions and no one should be using 3.0 but that can still be set as a minimum. A version of 3.0.15 could be warranted instead, though that's not actually the minimum supported version so that would feel odd to me.
Although I agree no one "should" be using a version that old, when I look at graphs for my extension, some folks still are using firefox older than 3.0.11
I'm curious... What are the arguments against adding it? Does it do some harm somewhere?
Added 3.0.11. (In reply to comment #7) > I'm curious... What are the arguments against adding it? Does it do some harm > somewhere? It's just another option to confuse people. Surprisingly, add-on developers often don't understand how the compatibility ranges work.
Assignee: nobody → fligtar
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Verified FIXED on https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/pages/appversions.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Product: addons.mozilla.org → addons.mozilla.org Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.