Look in to signing outside of AMO.

[numirias]

Look in to signing outside of AMO.

[numirias]

I'm gonna close this issue for now because I really don't think this is possible. If you find otherwise, you're more than welcome to reopen.

[numirias]

Would be nice. But do you have any reference to Mozilla supporting self-signing of addons? All ways described in the docs involve having it signed by Mozilla, which we can't do.

Even if I mimic Mozilla's signing process, the addon would show as corrupt on installation, so at very least users would also have to install and trust some custom certificate which seems to complicate the installation process even more.

[jtagcat]

I am not sure, I will ask around in Mozilla and try to do something.

I think it is possible, just look at this for example:

Just a simple warning to press ok to, should actually simplify the installation, now to hope is that it supports experimental APIs.

[numirias]

@jtagcat I think you're confusing something here. Your screenshot just shows the warning you get when a website that's not AMO triggers an addon installation. It's the same when you install Paxmod from the releases page on Github:

Unless you disable xpinstall.signatures.required, the addon must be signed by Mozilla, and otherwise doesn't install. However, Mozilla won't sign an extension with a bundled API experiment.

[jtagcat]

Talked with Mozilla people, self-signing is possible, but there isn't any point outside of ESR (what paxmod can be installed on anyway), since the normal version only approves AMO's signatures.