931935 - Add ratings as a requirement to go live

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Marketplace Graveyard :: Developer Pages, enhancement, P1)

Description

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

There is a new requirement that any new app must have a rating to go live.  This bug is to:

1) ensure that this is a requirement in the code now.

2) Add a "Next Steps" page  which links to the ratings entry page


UX: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=929803

Our Spec: https://docs.google.com/a/mozilla.com/document/d/1vc-pDhbFYKMDbA3Yamr8InA2M7kerBdc39qzPwIUMqk/edit#
 
IARC docs: https://docs.google.com/a/mozilla.com/file/d/0B96RwPRmGwk7LWc5Zjhrc2V5WXM/edit?usp=sharing

Comment 1

[Kevin Ngo [:ngoke]]

Currently, I have it so an app doesn't make it to the review queues without a content rating. 

Is that alright, or should it be able to make it to the queue, be approved, and flip public right when the rating is in?

Comment 2

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

I think reviewers also look at rating so the way you have it sounds correct to me.

Comment 3

[Kevin Ngo [:ngoke]]

https://github.com/mozilla/zamboni/pull/1328

Comment 4

[Andrew Williamson [:eviljeff]]

The logic in https://github.com/ngokevin/zamboni/commit/5333c6d5179ab22e9c50978ec9d5b4da3ffd853c is flawed.  An app should *only* change to status pending review when it is ready for review, and an app in that state should be always reviewable.
The immediate problems I can see are:
* all existing apps in the queue can't be reviewed
* the queue count at the top is wrong, and the reviewer landing page stats
* the reviewer search is broken - even with approved apps
* anywhere the status is indicated will be wrong (review page; lookup tool search) as it will appear the app is awaiting review when it is instead awaiting developer action.
* the admin search result page will be misleading

What should instead happen is the app is status incomplete until the rating is set (as the app is).  This is consistent with all the other settings an app needs to be ready for approval.

Comment 5

[Kevin Ngo [:ngoke]]

https://github.com/mozilla/zamboni/pull/1340

Comment 6

[Kevin Ngo [:ngoke]]

Thanks eviljeff

Comment 7

[Christopher Van Wiemeersch [:cvan]]

How are we handling existing apps and notifying developers that they need to get content ratings for their apps? Management command/email template?

Comment 8

[Kevin Ngo [:ngoke]]

Currently, a bold sentence on the app dashboard/My Submissions page that says "Your app will be disabled by January 13th if...". We'll need to notify developers via email, but that can be done later.

Comment 9

[Andrew Williamson [:eviljeff]]

(In reply to Kevin Ngo [:ngoke] from comment #8)
> Currently, a bold sentence on the app dashboard/My Submissions page that
> says "Your app will be disabled by January 13th if...". We'll need to notify
> developers via email, but that can be done later.

Is there a bug logged for the email notification?  We need to give developers as much notice as possible.  
Also, I assume the January 13 date will need to be changed if we're giving them 60 days notice still (60 days being Nov 14)

Comment 10

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

I don't think we've made any promises on Jan 13 - I'd expect it to be move to be honest.  A vaguer message may be appropriate, eg. "Your app may be disabled in the future if ..."

Comment 11

[Kevin Ngo [:ngoke]]

Yeah, sorry, the Jan. 13th date was probably just a placeholder in the mocks.

Comment 12

[Andrew Williamson [:eviljeff]]

Fwiw, I like stating an actual date (once we determine what the date is).  Saying 'may' implies we may not, when we absolutely will if they don't get a rating.

Comment 13

[Wil Clouser [:clouserw]]

(In reply to Andrew Williamson [:eviljeff] from comment #12)
> Fwiw, I like stating an actual date (once we determine what the date is). 
> Saying 'may' implies we may not, when we absolutely will if they don't get a
> rating.

I do too when we have one.  I replaced 'will' with 'may' to avoid the influx of emails to y'all asking about it when the details haven't been finished yet.  Once the ESRB has their stuff up and running and we're sure this works, by all means, lets put a date.