I should've been clearer, to reiterate what Andrei stated: We are not going to incorporate code from the ImportExportTools extension.  We just decided after many attempts that the only way it would appear possible to support this functionality, is to update the extension within the team.  I think it's also pretty universally understood 76 should have native support for import export independent of any extension nor including any external code. Mark rightly pointed out it's not proper to just take over the extension independent of the license type.  I think this is something we have to address, Ryan? I'm going to proceed with the work under the assumption will figure that out.  As Mark said, worse cases we have to fork and change the ID.  The idea of having a method whereby we can point users to "successor" extensions or whatever you want to call forked follow-on extensions would be good.  Certainly this is not the only case we will run into. Christopher

On 6/4/2019, 12:06:56 AM, Christopher Leidigh <cleidigh@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm going to proceed with the work under the assumption will figure that > out.  As Mark said, worse cases we have to fork and change the ID. Why do you have to change the ID? That belongs to Mozilla, not the Addon developer.

As I wrote earlier today, "Add-on IDs are not always assigned by Mozilla. All of the add-ons I created, for example, have IDs that I created which have the add-on name as part of the ID. Whether these IDs are protected by trademark law is perhaps an interesting legal question but probably not one that it would be productive for this list to debate."   Jonathan Kamens On 6/4/19 10:29 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 6/4/2019, 12:06:56 AM, Christopher Leidigh <cleidigh@gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm going to proceed with the work under the assumption will figure that >> out.  As Mark said, worse cases we have to fork and change the ID. > Why do you have to change the ID? That belongs to Mozilla, not the Addon > developer. > > _______________________________________________ > Maildev mailing list > Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net > http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net >

On 2019-06-04 12:11 p.m., Jonathan Kamens via Maildev wrote: > > As I wrote earlier today, "Add-on IDs are not always assigned by > Mozilla. All of the add-ons I created, for example, have IDs that I > created which have the add-on name as part of the ID. Whether these > IDs are protected by trademark law is perhaps an interesting legal > question but probably not one that it would be productive for this > list to debate." > Yeah and just so people are aware, the GUID for ImportExportTools is {3ed8cc52-86fc-4613-9026-c1ef969da4c3}. So potential trademark/naming issues don't apply in case of the ID for this case. So we don't need to go down into a deep derail about the legality of that :) All that said, I'm not entirely sure if we need the ID or if I can hack the versioncheck update script to link a different add-on for upgrade. A lot depends on how Thunderbird behaves in this case. If linking a different add-on in the right place in the JSON update data will get it to install a different add-on, then this is fairly straightforward. If however, it will only upgrade to the same ID, it's probably too late to make changes to that on the client side for 68, so we'll need to use the existing ID in some way.

A feature where ATN can designate an addon as successor of another, and automatically install the successor, would be a very useful feature for add-ons that are no longer maintained. i think we will need that in the future. this won't be the last case. Am 4. Juni 2019 21:30:32 MESZ schrieb Andrei Hajdukewycz <sancus@thunderbird.net>: >On 2019-06-04 12:11 p.m., Jonathan Kamens via Maildev wrote: >> >> As I wrote earlier today, "Add-on IDs are not always assigned by >> Mozilla. All of the add-ons I created, for example, have IDs that I >> created which have the add-on name as part of the ID. Whether these >> IDs are protected by trademark law is perhaps an interesting legal >> question but probably not one that it would be productive for this >> list to debate." >> >Yeah and just so people are aware, the GUID for ImportExportTools is >{3ed8cc52-86fc-4613-9026-c1ef969da4c3}. So potential trademark/naming >issues don't apply in case of the ID for this case. > >So we don't need to go down into a deep derail about the legality of >that :) > >All that said, I'm not entirely sure if we need the ID or if I can hack > >the versioncheck update script to link a different add-on for upgrade. >A >lot depends on how Thunderbird behaves in this case. If linking a >different add-on in the right place in the JSON update data will get it > >to install a different add-on, then this is fairly straightforward. > >If however, it will only upgrade to the same ID, it's probably too late > >to make changes to that on the client side for 68, so we'll need to use > >the existing ID in some way. > >_______________________________________________ >Maildev mailing list >Maildev@lists.thunderbird.net >http://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net -- Sent from my phone. Please excuse the brevity.