Closed
Bug 663732
Opened 13 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
Validator: Flag more types of common hidden files (thumbnail caches, directory settings, and auto-backups)
Categories
(addons.mozilla.org Graveyard :: Admin/Editor Tools, enhancement, P3)
addons.mozilla.org Graveyard
Admin/Editor Tools
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
Q3 2011
People
(Reporter: kmag, Assigned: basta)
References
Details
(Whiteboard: [ReviewTeam])
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0a1) Gecko/20110513 Firefox/6.0a1 Build Identifier: Hidden files have to be one of the most common issues we see in add-on submissions, made more difficult by the fact that authors often think they've removed them when it turns out that they haven't. I'd like to see the following flagged by default: • __MACOSX folders. These are a fairly major issue, since they're often comparable in size to the rest of the contents of the XPI. • .DS_Store and Thumbs.db files • Any dot-files, which would pick up the all too common Vim swap files. • Files ending in ~, for backup files generated by many editors. • *Possibly* *.bak, *.orig, *.rej for changes by patch(1) and the like. It would also be nice if duplicate files were flagged, given the fairly common case of including both a JAR of chrome and the entire unJARed chrome tree. Reproducible: Always
Comment 1•13 years ago
|
||
Dot-files and __MACOSX folders should already be flagged per bug 648416. Flagging more seems like a valid enhancement request, so confirming for that. I once almost got burned by *.orig because my diff program created them as backups from a large merge and by default ignored them in its diffs. Caught them manually, though, a warning for this would be nice just in case. I'd also add *.old to the list as I use those all the time. Thumbs.db are in every idiot's archive on the Internet, so yes please on that one. The Windows counterpart to .DS_Store is desktop.ini, so I'd suggest adding that one to the list too. On Linux .directory files are already being caught by the dot-prefix file filter. As to duplicates, that should probably be filed as a separate bug.
Severity: normal → enhancement
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Summary: Validator: Flag common hidden files → Validator: Flag more types of common hidden files (thumbnail caches, directory settings, and auto-backups)
Updated•13 years ago
|
Priority: -- → P3
Whiteboard: [required amo-editors]
Target Milestone: --- → Q3 2011
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•13 years ago
|
||
Ah, I didn't think to search closed bugs. It looks like my first test didn't zip the __MACOSX folder because it was empty. Dot-files are still ignored, though.
Depends on: 648416
Updated•13 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → mbasta
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•13 years ago
|
||
Do we have a script/tool to remove these files during packaging/deployment? It can be imaginably frustrating for developers to keep removing OS-generated files (__MACOSX/thumbs.db) time and time again. It might also be worth it to implement support in the repackager for removing those files automatically.
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•13 years ago
|
||
I'd be happy with that, but most developers expect the XPI they download to be the same one they uploaded, so I think it should be strictly opt-in. As for a utility, I've heard mention of one, but I can't name it. It's generally better for developers to just use packaging scripts.
Comment 5•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #4) > I'd be happy with that, but most developers expect the XPI they download to > be the same one they uploaded, so I think it should be strictly opt-in. The idea of auto-editing an uploaded addon has come up before and yes, I don't think anything should be touching uploads. There's always the risk of breaking something accidentally, I think it may break signed addons, and you might even get into complaints with regard to the addon's license. If there's a large amount of junk just have it be policy for the editor to reject and ask that it be fixed. Now, putting some sort of detector/cleaner in some Addon SDK tool might be a good idea.
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•13 years ago
|
||
I think with regard to signing we should be fine, since individual files are signed rather than the whole XPI. Sub-JARs would present issues. On the other issues, I agree, but since we are going to have repackaging in the future in any case, I think it would be fine to have this as an opt-in feature.
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•13 years ago
|
||
Done: https://github.com/mozilla/amo-validator/pull/66
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•13 years ago
|
||
Merged: https://github.com/mozilla/amo-validator/commit/859e2837920fd4818ab83a8990c4847c337b9a9a
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 9•12 years ago
|
||
Reclassifying editor bugs and changing to a new whiteboard flag. Spam, spam, spam, spam...
Whiteboard: [required amo-editors] → [ReviewTeam]
Updated•8 years ago
|
Product: addons.mozilla.org → addons.mozilla.org Graveyard
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•