27
edits
Update:Remora Idea Dump: Difference between revisions
Adding a section on sorting of addons
(Removed section about filing a new bug.) |
(Adding a section on sorting of addons) |
||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
: As mentioned on that bug, simply stating "it's not good how it is" is not helpful. If you've got any individual behaviours you'd like to suggest or discuss, please feel free to do so. Everyone working on Remora is already aware of the existing bugs. [[User:Cameron|Cameron]] 07:07, 31 August 2006 (PDT) | : As mentioned on that bug, simply stating "it's not good how it is" is not helpful. If you've got any individual behaviours you'd like to suggest or discuss, please feel free to do so. Everyone working on Remora is already aware of the existing bugs. [[User:Cameron|Cameron]] 07:07, 31 August 2006 (PDT) | ||
= Sorting of addons = | |||
If you look at the distribution of downloads between the first page (top 5), the extensions page (top 6-10) and the second "popular extensions" page (top 11-20) - there is always a ~50000 downloads gap in between. It is only natural that people find extensions on the first pages more easily but there are two problems here. First: once an extension manages is to the first page it gets more downloads and tends to stay there. Consequently the extensions on the first page aren't necessary the best extensions but rather the ones that got lucky (or got there early enough). Second: it seems that 50% if not more of all downloads are people who get to AMO looking for the "best" extensions and download whatever they find on the first page, regardless of whether they need it or not. At least that's what traffic stats on adblockplus.org indicate - they haven't changed a bit after download numbers doubled due to Adblock Plus being in the top10 (analyzing AMO's web logs would tell for sure of course). Those are probably also the people who will immediately blame Firefox for any issues they run into. | |||
Consequences: | |||
# Sorting should never be done by download numbers since the download numbers of the addons on the top only tend to increase - this discriminates newer addons | |||
# It is vital that any specially promoted extensions are of good quality (and being displayed on the first page is such a promoting) | |||
Metrics have been mentioned above and I think the one relevant here is QA approval. I would go as far as saying that no extension without QA approval should be displayed in a prominent position. And by this I mean that those extensions should really be tested thoroughly, somebody should look for anomalies in the source code (typical examples: replacing browser's built-in methods instead of extending them, using own versions of built-in XBLs, explicitely unwrapping content nodes). And the review will have to be repeated regularly (after X months, after X releases?). | |||
I am not sure whether "approved" addons should go first in other lists as well. In any case, they should be clearly marked - this will encourage authors of less popular addons to meet the requirements as well. | |||
Secondary sorting criterium could be rating - morgamic seems to think that he can get the ratings meaningful enough for that. | |||
--[[User:Wladimir Palant|Wladimir Palant]] 14:22, 1 September 2006 (PDT) | |||