So I fixed some issues with my addon (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-gb/developers/addon/click-dictionary), there is still one issue with assigning text to innerHTML, but this is done inside a template element, which should not be problematic in my understanding, is this a false positive or actually needs to be fixed before the extension is published. Can this warning, and similar warnings explain why the addon has been in review for 2 weeks and only advanced from 290 to around 250 position in the queue? Thanks
No, the delays in review are due to more add-on submission activity and less activity from volunteer reviewers. We’re working on ways to decrease the waiting times soon.
Thanks man. How can one become a volunteer?
Just quote from dashboard page:
Really feel a bit too long waiting time for reviews, and also relatively (much) strict criterias vs. Chrome extention (indeed, there is no real reviewers in Chrome side, right?).
I almost re-plant exactly same extension from Chrome to Firefox one month ago, which had been rejected twice , under waiting for 3rd round 
Similar case in Chrome might only need 5 minutes… not saying it’s better or worse, but just some concern on the efficiency of the process, if Mozilla take the ‘review’ process in add-on publishing.
Chrome does not review addon as vigorously as AMO. The consequence would be many uncheck processes.
https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threat-analysis/2016/01/rogue-google-chrome-extension-spies-on-you/
Furthermore, Chrome openly tracks every move a users makes on their browser. Adding additional Google tracking such as Google Analytic would be beneficial to Google. It is similar with other Google based libraries.
Mozilla aims to limit user tracking and respect user Privacy. The review process checks and rejects intrusive tracking.
That is one of the reasons that the review process is different in Chrome and Firefox.
Understood, and that’s the reason I am not judging the process itself as worse or better one, it’s purely depends on strategy level direction for both sides.
Just want to say, some improvement or new innovation might be needed , otherwise, hard to image how we can see the add-ons in Firefox can catch up and even beat somehow chrome side, as now, firefox add-on store , choices are so limited even I still remembered years ago when I jumped to Chrome, firefox was in kind of 'lead role ’ in the extension/addon field…
Why do you check my extension so long? I’ve been waiting 3 days! I have limited time! I ask you to publish this version immediately. Errors fixed and the code is used with the already approved version 1.1.4 (My add-on: https://addons.mozilla.org/ru/firefox/addon/payad-me/)
@iClaud in my case it’s not almost, it’s exactly the same 
in chrome it took 5 minutes, for Firefox it’s been 3 weeks so far. @erosman I see your point of view, probably in Chrome they are taking reviewing too lightly, and in Firefox, we do care about privacy, hence the thorough reviews, which is much appreciated, and that is one of the reason I keep waiting but given the difference in review time, between Firefox and Chrome, there is no way to compete, some improvement needs to be done to the process if, if, you want to compete with Chrome in terms of extensions.
And I think that this is not serious attitude towards developers, not “privacy policy”. In line for review right now 200 addons. How can they manage to check them for 3 weeks? This is a great disrespect for people who are engaged in this activity. It took me 3 minutes to correct the errors. They still checking my corrections for 4 days. If they respected the work of developers, they discussed the solution with the authors during the review. This would speed up the process and simplify the work for everyone. BUT they just pull the time and at the end deny and then you again get to the BACK OF THE QUEUE.
same pains… I can just suppose it’s one temporary tough period due to the early ‘trial stage’, otherwise, I can’t image how it can work, once the forcing transition to webapi happen…that might means huge number of extensions to be updated (or… no?) .
And because I am sometimes highly relying on the 2 extensions I made in daily life, after weeks waiting (and every time to manual load the addons…), I sadly to re-set Chrome as default browser. 
hope situation can be improved soon.
We will share our plans for add-on reviews soon. They should make WebExtension submission very painless.
I must say, I was actually surprised about the speed of the review process today.
I submitted a very small web extension (my first web extension ever, and my first javascript in 7 years, so it took me more than a working day for a tidy 0.1 version) yesterday evening (22:27CET) and was number 488 in the queue. It was approved this morning (6:43CET).
It was not 5 minutes, but just over 8 hours for a manual review while in a 488 long queue is certainly impressive.
It might be, though, that being small (<2kb zipped, containing 4 files each < 2 kb), with zero automated warnings and messages and only one simple functionality was an interesting target to review in a couple of spare minutes and was picked ahead of its time.
@jmros lucky you, I’ve been waiting for 1 month and 1 day now, for my 28kb with 1 automatic warning. Now 234 of 487! When I started I was 291 of 291.
@jorgev looking forward to see those improvments implemented!
I’m facing exactly the same problem. I’ve been waiting for 1 month and 2 weeks now !
In the same time we have almost 3 new versions to distribute.
Is there a way to accelerate the queue ?
It is difficult to wait for this process and to improve the future add-ons in the same time.
Check here and see if that helps…
https://discourse.mozilla-community.org/t/please-provide-a-list-of-best-practices-for-faster-reviews/15246/2