If an extension update fixes a serious bug, like a security bug, there should be a way to convey its importance.

Besides the technical implementation consistent criteria for deciding the severities will have to be defined for this to provide value.

Mass change - bugs to be read / (re)confirmed.

This would require the addition of a flag to the versions table, possibly versions.securityupdate, 1/0. That could trigger the existence of an RDF element, something like: <em:severity>major</severity>

We also need to figure out what to do about: * non-AMO add-ons -- do we allow them to be "major" when updating? * subsequent versions -- if 3.1 is a major update, what happens when 3.2 is released and the user has 3.0? must find a way to make 3.2 inherit the major flag, but only for versions < 3.1. See bug 304397 comment #2 and bug 304397 comment #5.

I see no reason for non-AMO add-ons to not have "major". This is to notify a user that there's a security vulnerability. We don't want them to be insecure just because they don't use AMO.

If this gets support in the client we can reopen.