Pale Moon forum

I have two questions related to this page:

https://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/

First question: Will there be an effort to save all AMO hosted extensions listed on this page? PM compatible AMO hosted extensions will probably disappear when Firefox 52 ESR bites the dust.

Second question is related to the colored dots in Pale Moon Add-ons Manager.

On the linked page there is an extension called EPUBReader. There is also an extension called Screengrab (fix version). Both extensions are hosted on AMO.

What is interesting is that EPUBReader has an orange dot in Pale Moon Add-ons Manager while Screengrab has a blue dot. I thought only Pale Moon hosted extensions had blue dots...

mr tribute wrote:Will there be an effort to save all AMO hosted extensions listed on this page?

There are plans to ensure all (relevant) extensions that do not otherwise prohibit redistribution are kept available even if AMO would decide to remove them.

mr tribute wrote:On the linked page there is an extension called EPUBReader. There is also an extension called Screengrab (fix version). Both extensions are hosted on AMO.

What is interesting is that EPUBReader has an orange dot in Pale Moon Add-ons Manager while Screengrab has a blue dot. I thought only Pale Moon hosted extensions had blue dots...

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=14280

OK, thanks for the info. Pale Moon is ready for the future, good to know!

{{extension removed}}
The extension that was requested above. version is 3.1.1.1

Moderator note: please DO NOT post extensions on the forum like this. I don't even see it being requested, but even so, you should point people to the proper place, or if it needs to be hosted on our add-ons site, contact the correct people to make that happen.

Such scraped extension collections could be hosted on the Internet Archive (archive.org) which is DMCA exempt!

Not too long ago I downloaded a reportedly compatible beta version of DownThemAll from the Internet Archive, when DownThemAll's site was temporarily inaccessible. Maybe this was only a fluke, but Internet Archive's copy was corrupted, confirmed via multiple downloads. (DownThemAll's site went back up a few days later, and their copy was fine.) Whatever repositories Pale Moon ends up relying on, I'd want them to have more robust file verification than Internet Archive appears to have.

Well, it looks like it's official. Jorge Villalobos told me today that AMO will be removing all legacy extensions when support for Fx ESR 52 runs out. I believe that will be in June, 2018.

I counted 149 total extensions available on the Pale Moon extension repository and many of them are hosted on AMO. How can we get the word out that developers need to upload to the PM repository? Or is there already a plan in the works?

I know I will be uploading all the extensions I've developed to the repository soon.

I'd encourage people to let developers know about our add-ons site, if (and only IF) they're willing to support Pale Moon. As we come closer to the deadlines for add-ons on AMO some developers might be on the verge of just plain giving up, or looking for alternatives that support their extensions. If they don't know about Pale Moon already, now's the chance.

Any that are interested in getting on the site should contact me. Details can be found here.

I am assuming that Pale Moon extensions have no signing requirements, correct? With Firefox, I had to use the Fx Developers Edition of the browser to write/test/debug. Will I be able to use just the standard PM release for development?

Also, do you (or anyone else) know if Mozilla will continue to host the XUL/XPCOM documentation on MDN Web Docs?

Extensions for Pale Moon can be signed if you want, but there isn't any formal requirement, no. You can use the standard release versions with unsigned add-ons.

The future is uncertain for Mozilla's XUL documentation. Archival sites such as the Internet Archive do have copies of this, though (for example, see here).

There are some extensions that work with Pale Moon but are being (or have been) removed from Mozilla's addons site. That is a shame since it is a disappearing resource. I keep backup copies of add-ons that I use, so I was able to use them in Pale Moon anyway. With a little modification to install.rdf in the installer, I could get them to install, and they worked. More than half of the extensions I have installed were not written for Pale Moon, but work anyway, and all I had to do was get them in there.

i think a sticky on how to achieve that would be most helpful.

This is what you have to add to install.rdf to get a Firefox extension to install in Pale Moon. Whether it works once you get it in there is another question, but most of the ones I tried worked (14 out of 16).

<!-- Pale Moon -->
<em:targetApplication>
<Description>
<em:id>{8de7fcbb-c55c-4fbe-bfc5-fc555c87dbc4}</em:id>
<em:minVersion>27.0.0b3</em:minVersion>
<em:maxVersion>29.*</em:maxVersion>
</Description>
</em:targetApplication>

This goes under a section that looks something like this:

<!-- Firefox -->
<em:targetApplication>
<Description>
<em:id>{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}</em:id>
<em:minVersion>45.0</em:minVersion>
<em:maxVersion>51.*</em:maxVersion>
</Description>
</em:targetApplication>

<!-- Seamonkey -->
<em:targetApplication>
<Description>
<em:id>{92650c4d-4b8e-4d2a-b7eb-24ecf4f6b63a}</em:id>
<em:minVersion>2.40</em:minVersion>
<em:maxVersion>3.0</em:maxVersion>
</Description>
</em:targetApplication>

Thank you kindly for that detailed description.

An easier way to install some of these add-ons is to use Moon Tester Tool. It changes not only the install.rdf but also the chrome.manifest (which in some cases is necessary for toolbar buttons and/or menu entries to appear). It also modifies HTTP response to that it is easier to donwnload and/or install files from AMO.

Lootyhoof wrote:Details can be found here.

Is there any way it can be updated? I feel a little uneasy trying to sell developers on Pale Moon and then direct them to a site that announces it is out of date. Harder for me to make the sell.

As if by magic, this is gone. It shouldn't be a bad thing anyway, since all it means is we were updating those pages to better reflect recent updates to the Add-ons Site.

If you have ventured to the mozilla addons site you will see it has be dramatically changed, it will not let you select the version, just tells you 'this cannot be used - use new version '..

PLEASE can PM make sure for the support of needed addons, specially those that link from the PM addon site to the mozilla URL...

illiad wrote:If you have ventured to the mozilla addons site you will see it has be dramatically changed, it will not let you select the version, just tells you 'this cannot be used - use new version '..

PLEASE can PM make sure for the support of needed addons, specially those that link from the PM addon site to the mozilla URL...

Don't panic!
Read about the Classic Add-ons Archive by JustOff.
Download and install latest release from here:
https://github.com/JustOff/ca-archive/releases

I see the part "75,687 versions of 16,706 Firefox add-ons" but where do I see WHAT these are?? or have I missed the point??