660889 - Bring back the validator help page

Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

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

Description

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

The add-on validator doesn't have very good explanations for many of its error messages and warnings. We (some editors) think that we should bring back the Help page, linked to from the validation pages, so that both devs and editors have a complete reference to the validation warnings and their meaning. Like we did with remora, changes to the validator should include changes to the help page to ensure it remains up to date.

Comment 1

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

You mean https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/pages/validation?  What do you mean bring it back?

Comment 2

[Kris Maglione [:kmag]]

It used to be linked from the validation results. It would also be nice if the individual warnings linked to specific targets on the page.

Comment 3

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

(In reply to comment #2)
> It used to be linked from the validation results. It would also be nice if
> the individual warnings linked to specific targets on the page.

This is what we need. The page needs updating since there are several new validations being run. However, I'm not sure if this page is planned to be migrated to zamboni anytime soon and if it's worth editing the current one.

Comment 4

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

It is super outdated at this point.  Linking to the main page works, but with the tests changing so frequently linking directly to anchors on the page sounds like a maintenance headache.

Comment 5

[Kris Maglione [:kmag]]

A devmo page would be better. If the anchors follow a pre-defined pattern (the tests have names) then we can create them as needed. Dead anchors won't do any harm.

Comment 6

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

I don't think this fits with devmo. The editor wiki would be a better place for it, but fligtar is generally against external sites. The validator isn't changing so rapidly now, and we can always go back to what we did before, where a validator patch includes the corresponding documentation patch. Andrew or I can do that.

Comment 7

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

Any kind of wiki sounds good to me.  What is the reasoning for being against external sites?

Judging by all the open validator bugs it seems like it's changing more now than it ever has, but maybe that's just my perception.

Comment 8

[Kris Maglione [:kmag]]

It seems to me that devmo is exactly the right place for it. Most of the relevant content that we'd link to already lives on devmo, and the info is relevant to add-on developers, even divorced from validator results.

Comment 9

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

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

Comment 10

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

I think the first step here is to make a page for us to link to.  Kris - is there a place on devmo you have in mind?  Can you create the page?

Comment 11

[Kris Maglione [:kmag]]

I'll create the page. I'm not quite sure where to put it, though.