The repo url you mentioned says 'No repo found':
https://git-tails.immerda.ch/verification-extension
> I also see that you initially tried to implement this with a message in 412cb50
and I would much prefer this approach. What made you change your mind
between 412cb50 and 80773cb?
Yeah, I originally planned to do it in web app but then noticed this
comment in web app 'This should be done by the extension instead' and
thought you want this in the extension.
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:21 PM, sajolida <sajolida@???> wrote:
> sajolida:
> > Uzair Farooq:
> >>> When the extension gets installed, the page is not updated to
> show "Verify download...". See this screencast:
> >>>
> >>> https://dl.poivron.org/maad2a3jiuqdu3k3wjbf-dirqyvooctlkem57
> >>> <https://dl.poivron.org/maad2a3jiuqdu3k3wjbf-dirqyvooctlkem57>
> >>>
> >>> Uzair: Could you help me fix that? Is it something that should be fixed
> >> in the extension or on the page?
> >>
> >> Fixed, extension will change the view to "Verify download..."
> >
> > I tried to test this change but now your branch conflicts when I try to
> > merge it in mine. It seems like you didn't merge the work I did on
> > https://git-tails.immerda.ch/verification-extension as I instructed in
> > https://mailman.boum.org/pipermail/tails-dev/2017-November/011853.html.
> >
> > Can you do that and ask for guidance if needed?
>
> I wanted to publish a new version of AMO so I did that merge and
> published 0.92:
>
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tails-verification/
>
> While doing this I came to wonder whether the version check was not
> broken again: the page asks for 1.0 minimum while it's 0.92 that is on
> AMO and the extension set 'data-extension="up-to-date"' on the page.
>
> Can you double-check what's going on?
>
> Also, probably since 80773cb, my console complains about
>
> "SyntaxError: redeclaration of let VerifyDownload"
>
> But I'm not sure that's important...
>
> > On top of this, I'm worried to see that you copied some of the code and
> > display logic that we have on the page into the extension (80773cb).
> > Until now, this was quite decoupled and the display logic was happening
> > only on the page (in dave_2.js).
> >
> > I also see that you initially tried to implement this with a message in
> > 412cb50 and I would much prefer this approach. What made you change your
> > mind between 412cb50 and 80773cb
>
