When people talk about wanting Firefox to have an open structure that treats Mozilla and non-Mozilla people the same, they are talking about things like https://github.com/gregglind/addon-wr/issues/36 …. There is no good reason why "sideloading an ad to FF" needs to be a thing Mozilla Corp is able to do.
-
-
Replying to @wycats
Do you think this would have been a problem if it just didn’t show up in the add-on manager at all, and was invisible?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gavinsharp
If people had figured out the mechanism, yeah. "Firefox added an add-on invisibly and it didn't show up on my add-on list" pretty bad.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats
What if it was part of a normal Firefox update? What I’m getting at is the mechanism for getting the code there is not important (except to nerds who care about these subtle distinctions).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gavinsharp
I don't appreciate the "nerds" bucketing and I think you're ignoring why people are upset. Firefox silently delivered an ad to people without talking to anyone. Lots of people use Firefox because they trust the org and its leadership.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats
(I’m a nerd too - was not meant pejoratively) Legit to be upset about the co-marketing (although I think it didn’t actually affect many users? I didn’t see it). But that’s not the initial argument you seemed to be making AIUI!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I have always maintained that I have no objection to Mozilla Corp doing search deals and other business things wrt Firefox. But I think there are relatively few such things, and that the rest of the project should be run by an community governance process.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.