I’m checking this article about self hosted add-ons that states:
An object containing one entry for each add-on to be updated. For each such entry, the name of the property must be the add-on’s UUID, and the value must be an object describing the add-on and its updates.
Isn’t the UUID random for each user though? Shouldn’t the add-on’s ID be used instead?
This is some inconsistency in the naming. In Firefox, you will see the “Internal UUID” and “Extension ID”. On the AMO website, the “Extension ID” is called the “UUID”. The document you referenced is referring to the “Extension ID”, as you suspected.
You can manually set the UUID/Extension ID in the manifest using browser_specific_settings. Alternatively, you should get a random one assigned when the add-on is signed.
Thanks for the clarification! Maybe terminology needs some fixing in order to be less confusing.
On the other hand, it wouldn’t make sense for the internal UUID to be used in the update manifest as this is not common for everyone and obviously updates wouldn’t work, so it is kind of obvious that the Extension ID is the one that should be used.
I agree. I filed a bug to see if the terminology could be changed or maybe further clarification could be added.