575632 - Add-on pages don't show latest version

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(addons.mozilla.org Graveyard :: Public Pages, defect, P2)

Description

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

This page should show version 3.3, but it currently shows version 3.2:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/53880/
Version 3.3 was uploaded yesterday at around 6pm, so it should have been updated a long time ago.

Comment 1

[quickemail.007]

(In reply to comment #0)
> This page should show version 3.3, but it currently shows version 3.2:
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/53880/
> Version 3.3 was uploaded yesterday at around 6pm, so it should have been
> updated a long time ago.

Hope that this bug gets fixed soon. Has this bug been accorded a high priority status for immediate resolution?

Comment 2

[quickemail.007]

Don't forget to inform us about the reason for this bug actually occurring on the AMO site... it is a v.strange bug and we're curious to know how it actually occurred in the first place, and if you have taken some steps to prevent the re-occurrence on AMO!

Comment 3

[IDEVFH]

Hi AMO,

I don't know if this info will help solve the issue but outside of updating the version of "Memory Fox" to 3.3 I noticed the Description of the add-on had exceeded 250 to 254 characters. I changed the description to normalize to the 250 or less character range. Then added the developers comment for the last piece to update.

Richard
or
IDEVFH

Comment 4

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

This is happening on public add-ons as well:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1833/
Version 7.3.3 should be on the main page by now.

Comment 5

[mcdavis941 (sporadically reading bugmail)]

This is happening with my (public) add-on too: 

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4908/

I uploaded a new version for the release channel around 11PM Pacific last (Monday) night, but it's not showing up on the listing page yet.

Comment 6

[Shantanu Oak]

I had the same problem. When I click on "add to firefox" link, I got an error...

Firefox could not install the file at

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/downloads/latest/12797/addon-12797-latest.xpi?src=addondetail

because: Invalid file hash (possible download corruption)
-261

I contacted mozilla support and the issue was resolved. I thought that it was due to a different version numbers mentioned in install.rdf and install.js files. I corrected the problem and published new version, but I guess it was due to some other reason.

Comment 7

[krupa raj[:krupa]]

STR:

1.Notice the latest version of Flagfox in the add-on details page(4.0.7)- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/5791/

2.Go to all versions page and notice the latest version listed (4.0.8pre)https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/5791/versions/

observed behavior:
Add-on detail page does not list the latest version.

Comment 8

[Jeff Balogh (:jbalogh)]

We prefer showing public versions.

Comment 9

[Dave Garrett]

Yes, latest ^public version. Beta/prerelease versions are correctly ignored.

Comment 10

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

It appears that this is still happening: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/7757/

The add-on page shows version 1.11.09, while version 1.12.7 is the latest public version, approved yesterday.

Comment 11

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

Reopening based on comment 10.

Comment 12

[Jeff Balogh (:jbalogh)]

oremj: is celery doing alright after yesterday?  I haven't seen any tracebacks.  

We should figure out some sort of monitoring for tasks.  I can't wait til we can buy some people to implement these great ideas.

Comment 13

[Jerome]

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/7757/

should be displaying v1.12.7

Comment 14

[Jeremy Orem [:oremj]]

Looks like the workers were up, but in some weird state after the HUP. I've done a full restart and it looks like they are processing tasks.

Comment 15

[Martin Meissnitzer]

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/7749/
should be v2.4.0 (at least for the Windows version which has been approved on July 14).

Comment 16

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

I think we're back to good here, I see the right version for comment 13

Comment 17

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

I'm a little concerned that we're not finding the root of the problem here. I bet I'll have to reopen this bug a few times more...

Comment 18

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

oremj - anything we can do to prevent this?

Comment 19

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

Reclassifying editor bugs and changing to a new whiteboard flag. Spam, spam, spam, spam...