Reviews for Nightly Tester Tools
Nightly Tester Tools by Automation Development, Henrik Skupin, xabolcs, Kohei Yoshino
Rated 4.1 out of 5
4.1 Stars out of 5
Rated 5 out of 5
209 reviews
- by LaraH, 18 days agoRated 5 out of 5
- by cgc, 5 months agoRated 5 out of 5
- by HotCakeX, 5 months agoRated 5 out of 5
- by Paul B, 8 months agoRated 4 out of 5
- by kriztmark, 8 months agoRated 5 out of 5
- by CASANOVA, 9 months agoRated 1 out of 5
- by Phillip, a year agoRated 4 out of 5If you want to copy something that you wouldn't normally want to, this is the extension for you.
WebExtensionAPI has pretty much sent everything else down the loo. - by Firefox user 14474607, 2 years agoRated 5 out of 5
- by PERCE-NEIGE, 2 years agoRated 1 out of 5I used this one for "force addon compatibility". Missing greatly.
Developer response
posted 2 years agoPlease see https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/nightly-tester-tools/reviews/1095111/, where we already described why it's not needed anymore. Where exactly do you have problems?
If that fixes your problem please reconsider the rating of the extension. Thanks. - by Firefox user 14242224, 2 years agoRated 5 out of 5
- by Firefox user 14137740, 2 years agoRated 5 out of 5
- by axtual, 2 years agoRated 5 out of 5
Developer response
posted 2 years agoJust in short this feature is not necessary anymore since Firefox 57 when only extensions based on the WebExtension API are allowed in Firefox. As such it has been removed.
If you have problems with a feature you should contact the support site or send an email instead of writing negative reviews on AMO. We would be happy if you could adjust your rating. Thanks.- by Michal Stanke, 2 years agoRated 5 out of 5
- by OneLag, 2 years agoRated 1 out of 5Sadly it doesn't work anymore to force addons compatibility =(
- by grahamperrin, 2 years agoRated 4 out of 5I'll use this occasionally with Waterfox.
More generally – for any Firefox-like browser – identifying extensions primarily by name is troublesome. Because addons.mozilla.org (AMO) too often makes it unnecessarily difficult to find by name; because developers too often use multiple names for a single product; and so on – so I can't give five stars.
The extension could be improved by more positively identifying extensions. Include:
- either the AMO address of the extension, non-localised, for example https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/nightly-tester-tools/
- or (if not listed on AMO) ideally the support URL, less ideally the home URL.
If no URLs is associated with the extension, be explicit about the absence of a support URL.Developer response
posted 2 years agoThank you for the review. Also those are helpful information in how we can make NTT a better extension. Would you mind to file those as new issues in our issue tracker on github? We would kinda appreciate it, and make sure that it will be included in one of the future releases.
The issue tracker can be found here: https://github.com/mozilla/nightlytt/issues
Thanks. - by Kot, 2 years agoRated 4 out of 5Is "disable addon compatibility checking" feature still there? Can't find it anymore.
- by Gordon Dry, 3 years agoRated 2 out of 5Please do not ONLY use WebExtensions, read this:
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=15928
and make Pale Moon work again. - by WRCS-UK, 3 years agoRated 1 out of 5@ Henriik
I understand your sensitivity to my recent review in which (among other things) I congratulated you on keeping Nightly afloat.
I cannot, in all honesty, change my "star rating" because, whosoever's fault it is, Nightly is a shadow of it's former self.
Sadly, I do not have the skills required to help. This makes me sad.Developer response
posted 3 years agoYou are welcome to raise issues of missing or broken behavior on Github. The issue tracker for the add-on can be found at https://github.com/mozilla/nightlytt/issues.
At least with that you can let us know of things you are not satisfied with. Please file individual issues for each of the things you have in mind if not existent yet. - by jojo-g, 3 years agoRated 5 out of 5Why we skip support from Web Extension version of the add on for 55 version of Firefox?
Developer response
posted 3 years agoCan you please explain what you mean with `WE`? Also do you ask regarding the uploaded beta version of the rewritten extension? Maybe you can clarify the question a bit. Thanks. - by Firefox user 12473153, 3 years agoRated 5 out of 5The user who wrote the reviews as IMHO an idiot (almost!). The developer took his time and gave a considered reply Solving the reviewers problems. And why I am writing this is becasue he did not even have the manners to thank for the reponse. I hope most things get screwed up for him/her. We need better standards on the web. Feel free to repond to me offline. Dont know if poss from this site.