Page 4 of 6

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-05, 20:33
by JustOff
Classic Add-ons Archive 2.0.1 has been released with the following changes:
  • Added the extensions removed from AMO before October 2017
  • Recovered other extension files lost by Mozilla
  • Fixed creation times for extensions corrupted on March 5, 2007
This is a major update that adds 17,669 versions and 2,744 new add-ons to the catalog, making it the most comprehensive Firefox classic extensions directory has ever existed.

I also want to thank Tobin, who shared his personal add-ons archive, and inspired me to make this update happen.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-05, 20:36
by New Tobin Paradigm
Spectacular work!

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-05, 23:58
by coffeebreak
JustOff wrote:Classic Add-ons Archive 2.0.1 has been released

Stupendous. Great thanks for this project.

(and to Tobin, thank you for sharing your archive with us all)

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-06, 00:28
by New Tobin Paradigm
In the end.. It was the best possible decision for everyone.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-06, 14:18
by firefoxed
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:Spectacular work!
This.
Huge thanks.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-06, 14:59
by Tomaso
You've done a really good job with this, JustOff!
Kudos!! :)

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-09, 15:36
by Moonraker
Quite a large download for the archive.Is there a tidy comprehensive list of what is actually in this archive?..Have they been tested or is it hit and miss whether they work or not.If palemoon is diverging that much then the chances of most of them working will decrease.
It really needs an alphabetical list of what is in there.
Regards.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-09, 17:31
by New Tobin Paradigm
You know full well that FIREFOX Extensions on Pale Moon are on an as-is basis.. This archive contains only Firefox Extensions.. Stop being a moron.

Also, does it need an alphabetical list? How would that help for 16k extensions?

Additionally, the archive is a preservation effort.. People should, if licenses allow, continue to fork older Firefox extensions as Pale Moon and other UXP application targeted extensions. But of course you won't.. ever.. You are so low IQ that you don't even understand the point of what we are all collectively trying to do.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-09, 17:40
by firefoxed
Moonraker wrote:It really needs an alphabetical list of what is in there.
or you could do it yourself like this:
  • open ca-archive@Off.JustOff.xpi (or whatever name you have for the add-on) with 7-zip
  • open ca-archive-19030501.sqlite in the content\db folder using DB browser for sqllite
  • execute this sql query: select name from addons order by name
  • enjoy browsing through 19,450 rows

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-09, 22:33
by Moonraker
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:You know full well that FIREFOX Extensions on Pale Moon are on an as-is basis.. This archive contains only Firefox Extensions.. Stop being a moron.

Also, does it need an alphabetical list? How would that help for 16k extensions?

Additionally, the archive is a preservation effort.. People should, if licenses allow, continue to fork older Firefox extensions as Pale Moon and other UXP application targeted extensions. But of course you won't.. ever.. You are so low IQ that you don't even understand the point of what we are all collectively trying to do.
Very rude answer which i will not dignify with an answer...so folks here is a scenario for you.user knows name of extension but has to trawl through thousands of entries to find it and that is if its even in there..do you catch my drift mr tobin...?

Your grammar by the way needs attention.
I would sooner have 1000 extensions in there that are known to work with palemoon reliably rather than 16k of them with a hit and miss "as is" status.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 00:49
by Trapper
Moonraker wrote: I would sooner have 1000 extensions in there that are known to work with palemoon reliably rather than 16k of them with a hit and miss "as is" status.
Then why don't you get busy testing 16K, instead of whining about it? Or would you rather have somebody else do that & hand it to you on a silver platter?

And while you're at it, you could fork the ones that aren't compatible. Sheesh

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 00:52
by Tomaso
Moonraker wrote:user knows name of extension but has to trawl through thousands of entries to find it
What do you mean?
Classic Add-ons Archive already has a search function, which allows you to search for extension names.
..and JustOff even aims to improve it, by implementing description search:
https://github.com/JustOff/ca-archive/issues/46/

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 01:33
by Moonraker
Trapper852 wrote:
Moonraker wrote: I would sooner have 1000 extensions in there that are known to work with palemoon reliably rather than 16k of them with a hit and miss "as is" status.
Then why don't you get busy testing 16K, instead of whining about it? Or would you rather have somebody else do that & hand it to you on a silver platter?

And while you're at it, you could fork the ones that aren't compatible. Sheesh
You need a chill pill and start to relax..To be honest i wasn't exactly whining about it just making an observation and having an opinion.

Trapper is an interesting name and here in england we have an expression.."shut ya trap" lol.
Best wishes.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 02:42
by New Tobin Paradigm
Trapper852 wrote:Or would you rather have somebody else do that & hand it to you on a silver platter?

And while you're at it, you could fork the ones that aren't compatible. Sheesh
Indeed he does want it all on a silver platter.. He also will won't fork any extensions.. ever.. He is so low IQ that he doesn't even understand the point of what we are all collectively trying to do.

He won't even abide by viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19727

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 09:27
by Moonraker
New Tobin Paradigm wrote:
Trapper852 wrote:Or would you rather have somebody else do that & hand it to you on a silver platter?

And while you're at it, you could fork the ones that aren't compatible. Sheesh
Indeed he does want it all on a silver platter.. He also will won't fork any extensions.. ever.. He is so low IQ that he doesn't even understand the point of what we are all collectively trying to do.

He won't even abide by viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19727
I have never said i wanted things on a silver platter,you said such a thing.Just asking about a basic function that's all..chill pill for mr tobin i think.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 11:01
by gepus
Moonraker wrote:I have never said i wanted things on a silver platter,...
You've suggested that somebody should check 16K extensions written for Firefox if they also work with Pale Moon and recheck as often as Pale Moon will make some changes to its code.
This is naive at best and dumb at worst.
As for the need of an alphabetical list which you are suggesting - how would it be of any convenience for you?
You have the convenient option to search for extensions instead of going through 16K extensions in alphabetical order.
So yet another naive at best and dumb at worst suggestion.

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 11:43
by Moonraker
gepus wrote:
Moonraker wrote:I have never said i wanted things on a silver platter,...
You've suggested that somebody should check 16K extensions written for Firefox if they also work with Pale Moon and recheck as often as Pale Moon will make some changes to its code.
This is naive at best and dumb at worst.
As for the need of an alphabetical list which you are suggesting - how would it be of any convenience for you?
You have the convenient option to search for extensions instead of going through 16K extensions in alphabetical order.
So yet another naive at best and dumb at worst suggestion.
its a perfectly reasonable thing to expect.Do you seriously expect people to trawl through the archive and then discover the extension may not work..?
Of course people expect the extension to work in palemoon and if it doesnt then your just wasting people's time.
maybe it's a sign of things to come as the divergence continues. ;)

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 12:34
by gepus
Speaking of wasting people's time - joined Oct 01, 2015 with 960 posts (and counting) on these forums and you still understand nothing. :)

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 12:44
by Moonraker
gepus wrote:Speaking of wasting people's time - joined Oct 01, 2015 with 960 posts (and counting) on these forums and you still understand nothing. :)
Gepus you sir are a credit to cretins worldwide..i would term you an asshole but assholes actually have a use in life lol..
enjoy your day.!!

Re: Classic Add-ons Archive

Posted: 2019-03-10, 12:53
by Tomaso
Why not just keep things objective, folks?
There's a needless hostile tone, and a lot of bashing going on in this forum, both from users and developers.
Nothing good will come from it, really.