User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20091221 Firefox/3.5.7 Build Identifier: Task: make old extensions usable again, so people aren't blocked from upgrading if they need a certain extension. Suggested solution: Let anyone patch broken extension if the original author doesn't take care of it himself. How to: Having the Add-on compatibility reporter already to report incompatibilies, it would be a great thing if in the following would happen: 1. It is confirmed (or precisely not) that the extension is broken (skip rest if not;) 2. The original extension author gets an email on the broken extension 3. If the author doesn't respond (* see below) within a certain range of time (e.g. two weeks for example), then the incompatibility will be shown on the website and additionally (the great idea;) an "I can fix this"-link will appear. This would allow anyone to submit a fix for this extension which would undergo the review process as any update that the original author would submit. (*) respond = submits a new version OR maybe even clicks a sort of WILL FIX IT SOON button, that allows to postpone the rest of the process mentioned above by some time (e.g. for another two weeks) I think it might help to fix a lot of problems (even though it is some work to implement). I still hope you like it. Reproducible: Always

This would be nice for the future, but I don't think it can happen anytime soon: * Add-on compatibility reports are often misleading and we're still working on how to make them more reliable * Add-ons can only be modified like that if they have an open source license, and even then it would require creating a new add-on entry, as we can't give another author access to an add-on's users without that author's permission. * A "broken add-on" means different things to different people. One person thinks an add-on is broken without one feature and someone else thinks an add-on is broken with that feature. So, while this is a nice idea, I don't think it's really feasible.

Duplicate of bug 278234?