Pale Moon forum

1. "Home Styler" should be in Appearance instead of Tools & Utilities.
http://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/t ... utilities/

2. "CLEO" should be in Tools & Utilities instead of Privacy & Security.
http://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/p ... -security/

3. "OPIE" and "OPIE2" should be in Tools & Utilities instead of Privacy & Security.
http://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/p ... -security/

The add-on authors, not the add-ons site team, are the ones who specify what categories their add-ons fall under. Please bring it up with them.

I remember a long while ago when all the add-ons were put on a single list without categories. You can check the archive here.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170408225 ... xtensions/

It's logical to then think that the webmaster has authority to group them into different categories for better organization.

Did every single author contact the webmaster to explicitly direct the add-on into a specific category?

Add-on authors shouldn't have the final say over whether the programs are alphabetically listed or not. In my opinion, they shouldn't have final say for category either.

Since Tobin's wonderful self-serve panel, extension authors can set meta data for their extensions themselves.

Alright, I'll spend the extra time contacting each author if they want to change the category.

I thought I was helping with just simple fixes so that other users can find what add-ons they're looking for....

It's possible an author quickly just added in a category without giving it a 2nd thought and then made a small inaccuracy when another category would have been a better fit. Simply changing category is not something the author should have to be burdened with.... The webmaster should take care of these things without having to seek confirmation from the author.

The add-on itself is what counts, and changing the category in no way diminishes the add-on or the credit given to the add-on.

You are helping by pointing it out! It's appreciated that you want to make the addons site better than it currently is, make no mistake, and we thank you for it!
I was just saying that the authors can (and should) do this themselves; also since we don't want to have to police each author if they are using the proper categories with each update. It's in their own interest to set the proper category to be discoverable.

Unlike AMO was, we all don't want to impose too much when it comes to our Unified Add-ons Site System. Phoebus is designed to treat all add-ons and target applications equally so that no extension, no application will get an advantage over any other. My self as the developer of the software and administrator of the underlying server in addition to the designated Add-ons Team personnel is not here to dictate terms or micromanage the datastore and submissions.

That being said the software is designed to operate within specific boundaries as well as the most basic and required guidelines must be observed in regards to rights holders and in terms of curating and cultivating our growing selection of add-ons.

In general if an add-on does not violate the rights of others or presents an unacceptable privacy or stability problem, reviews both upon submission of a new add-on and periodic checkups thereof are only a mundane formality.

Everything else is up to the developers them selves (including choosing a category) as they are the ones putting in the work. The Phoebus Software is designed to do two things. 1) Get people to add-ons and 2) let developers get add-ons to people. This was my vision when I started the Pale Moon Add-ons Site in late 2014/early 2015 and I am glad that today we have a system designed to do just that. Not just for Pale Moon but for any allied UXP Application.