uBlock Origin Lite maker ends Firefox store support, slams Mozilla for hostile reviews

Having gone through the review process myself many many times over the past decade, I can only relate to the developer. On the Google side of things, it is your typical Google silence treatment or just clearly template answers. Which is frustrating, but somehow didn't feel as bad as when it clearly was a human who wrote their own reply.

Which is why on the Mozilla side, things felt a bit more spicy and boneheaded at times.
To be clear, a lot of the reviewers we dealt with were great. But every now, and then you would encounter a reviewer who clearly had no clue or no interest in actually figuring out what was going on, nor the willingness to explain further. This often resulted in a lot of back and forth communication, trying to submit newer versions, somewhat guessing what they wanted to change. Other times things got resolved only when another reviewer was added.

I believe reviewers at AMO are volunteers, and there probably aren't that many people capable enough who are willing to do the work. Some of the things that got flagged were also fair and shouldn't have been implemented in the way we did. At the same time, some of the issues had been in our code base for years, benign and no reason to block a release. Certainly not hotfixes (with actual security updates) where the flagged code is nowhere near the fixed code.

So I don't want to bash on them too much, but it certainly was frustrating to deal with at times.

I hope they work this out and the review process improves, because browser extensions often have high privileges and they should have an outside security review before being published. Most users are not in a position to do this. Self-publishing with no review is unfortunately the norm for open source software, but it’s a problem, as recent supply chain attacks have shown.