Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Export submit-addon via package.json #3250

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kewisch
Copy link

@kewisch kewisch commented Sep 12, 2024

Fixes #3241

@kewisch kewisch force-pushed the submit-addon branch 2 times, most recently from e9c64c4 to 5be4f46 Compare September 12, 2024 13:19
@kewisch
Copy link
Author

kewisch commented Sep 12, 2024

Test failure is blocking sec issues, I didn't add any deps so I don't think I can fix this.

Note that locally the test I added runs as "pending", both with and without my changes. Might be something up with that one?

@Rob--W
Copy link
Member

Rob--W commented Sep 12, 2024

The npm audit issues are pre-existing. I think that @rpl or @willdurand was going to address that.

@rpl
Copy link
Member

rpl commented Sep 13, 2024

The npm audit issues are pre-existing. I think that @rpl or @willdurand was going to address that.

yes, I was the one that was meant to followup on that.

The transitive dependency that was making us hitting the npm audit failure is part of sinon dependencies and despite the fact that the previous PR that was updating sinon to 18.0.1 was still failing (which was what I was going to take a look into), the new PR for sinon 19.0.0 (#3251) did actually pass the npm audit CI job step and so I proceeded with merging it.

@kewisch would you mind to rebase this PR to confirm that the CI job failure is gone as expected?

@kewisch
Copy link
Author

kewisch commented Sep 14, 2024

Looks like we're good :)

@rpl
Copy link
Member

rpl commented Nov 7, 2024

We discussed about this in the triage meeting and we agreed to move forward with merging this PR but also update the README.md file to clarify what Note: There is limited support for this API. means (in particular that there is no guarantees about backward compatibility in new web-ext versions).

@kewisch
Copy link
Author

kewisch commented Nov 15, 2024

I added a note to the readme, does that look good?

@rpl
Copy link
Member

rpl commented Nov 21, 2024

I added a note to the readme, does that look good?

In comment #3250 (comment) I was referring to expanding/rewording the existing **Note:** There is limited support for this API that we have at the start of the section here:

**Note:** There is limited support for this API.

Nonetheless, I think the note you added may also be worth keeping (because the sign command entrypoint is more likely to stay stable then the internal signAddon module).

In the meantime, I'm going to approving and merging this version, we can followup to tweak that other note in a separate PR.

Copy link
Member

@rpl rpl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@kewisch I've added one more review comment related to a just small nit/thought that I wanted to mention you explicitly before proceeding with merging this PR.

xpiPath: pathToExtension,
savedUploadUuidPath: '.amo-upload-uuid',
channel: 'unlisted',
userAgentString: 'web-ext/0.2',
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@kewisch I think it may be worth to tweak this example to suggest using a userAgentString that makes it clear which web-ext version they are using and maybe include a custom part to highlight this was sent by using signAddon internal method programmatically

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Allow programatically signing from an xpi file
3 participants