Info step: Plugin Author
Problem
In the Info step, a verified Developer Identity is selected first.
The Plugin Author field directly below it is still freely editable, even though the form states that it must match the verified legal name or business name.
This means the form allows a developer to submit a value that is already known to be inconsistent with the selected verified identity.
In my case, this mismatch was accepted by the form and only became an issue during review.
Suggested solution
Pre-fill the Plugin Author field with the name from the selected Developer Identity.
If changing it is necessary, make that an explicit action, for example:
Plugin Author: [verified name] Edit
If the edited value no longer matches the selected identity, show a validation warning before submission.
Minor formatting differences could still be allowed, while materially different names could require additional business or DBA verification.
Impact
The platform already has both values at submission time.
Validating them there could prevent an avoidable sequence of:
submission → review → ownership rejection → correction → resubmission → review
and reduce work for both developers and reviewers.
Testing step: Test credentials
Problem
In the Testing step, the Username and Password fields do not appear to behave consistently.
For the same OAuth based submission, I have seen these fields be optional in one pass through the multi-step form and required after returning to or updating the step.
In an OAuth flow where reviewers authenticate through the normal authorization flow, separate test-account credentials may not exist at all.
When Username and Password become required, the only way to continue is to enter explanatory placeholder values into fields intended for actual credentials.
Suggested solution
Make the requirement explicit instead of deriving it implicitly from the current form state.
A simple checkbox could be enough:
☑ No additional test credentials required
When selected, Username and Password would remain optional or be hidden.
The existing testing instructions could then explain how the reviewer should complete the OAuth flow.
Impact
This would make the form state predictable, avoid artificial credentials and give reviewers a clearer indication of how authentication is expected to work.
