Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Is there a way to create two separate update channels for a Firefox extension that will serve as stable and beta? This article show the way for those who use AMO to publish their extensions. I use my own hosting and I’d like to do it using update manifest. If I describe several versions there, the newest one is downloaded, even if there’s a or b suffix.
Firefox will always install the highest compatible version it finds in an update manifest, there is no built-in channel mechanism for extensions. So to implement different channels you have to make sure that extensions on different channels will get different update manifests. AMO does that by looking at the extension version requesting the update manifest (which it can see because the default
updateURLvalue containsversion=%ITEM_VERSION%parameter), versions ending withaNNorbNNget a different update suggested than regular versions. You could implement a similar mechanism on your server. Personally, I chose a simpler route, one that can work with a staticupdate.rdfon the server – my build scripts will simply put a differentupdateURLvalue intoinstall.rdfdepending on whether I am building a release version or a test build.