Hello reviewers, I have submitted version-name 1.1.2 to align this extension with the current companion backend 3.1.1 and GitHub release. It replaces the pending 1.1.1 submission. The frontend JavaScript is unchanged; the companion release fixes rule application, stale-source previews, current-parameter preview planning and applied-revision status. This ZIP contains readable GJS frontend code, metadata, CSS/SVG assets, schema XML, the GPLv3 license and optional maintainer-authorized support images. It contains no Python code, executable binaries, installers, downloads or telemetry, and omits schemas/gschemas.compiled. The separately distributed GPL-3.0-or-later companion is installed explicitly by the user; the extension does not install it or request root access. Image processing is isolated from the Shell and GTK 4 preferences. Requests use fixed argument arrays and JSON stdin, with bounded read cancellation and asynchronous completion of writes. The companion's independent user-level timer/path maintenance has visible controls. The supported shell-version is ["51"], tested on GNOME Shell 51.0. GNOME 51 was released on September 16, 2026: https://release.gnome.org/51/ . Please assess the experimental EGO-M-004 finding as a possible false positive. I have not added untested Shell versions to bypass it. Current release checks pass: strict schema compilation, source/ZIP equality, privacy checks, 17 JS syntax files and 38 frontend logic checks. The companion passes 160 backend and 19 installation/rollback tests. The full GUI/lock-unlock matrix was not rerun for this patch release; prior acceptance scope is documented rather than claimed as new. Could you please advise whether any additional information or changes are required to proceed, particularly regarding the separately installed companion architecture and the Shell-version finding? I understand review is volunteer work and appreciate your time. Release and complete companion: https://github.com/TengJoe/icon-normalizer-plugin/releases/tag/v1.1.2 Source at the release tag: https://github.com/TengJoe/icon-normalizer-plugin/tree/v1.1.2 Review boundary: https://github.com/TengJoe/icon-normalizer-plugin/blob/v1.1.2/docs/SUBMISSION.md

Is this code generated by AI? If so, we have a rule for that: - [EGO Review Guidelines: AI](https://gjs.guide/extensions/review-guidelines/review-guidelines.html#extensions-must-not-be-ai-generated) - [Extensions Best Practices Guidelines](https://gjs.guide/extensions/review-guidelines/best-practices.html#submissions-require-maintainership)

Hi JustPerfection, Yes, this project has used AI assistance extensively, including code generation and refactoring. Thank you for pointing me to the guidelines. I understand that submitting an extension means taking responsibility for its code and ongoing maintenance. I have been using it on my own GNOME desktop, identifying problems during daily use, and addressing them with regression tests. However, I understand that successful tests alone do not demonstrate the JavaScript knowledge and maintainership required by EGO. Could you clarify what you would need from me to proceed with this submission? In particular, is AI-assisted development acceptable when the submitter can understand, debug, and maintain the resulting code, or is there a broader restriction that applies here? I would like to understand the requirements before uploading another revision. If I cannot meet the maintainership requirements, I will keep the extension distributed outside EGO until I can. Thank you for your time and guidance.

Hi JustPerfection, Thank you for your guidance. As disclosed above, this project has used AI assistance extensively, including code generation and refactoring. I can read, debug and maintain the JavaScript/GJS and accept responsibility for reviewing and maintaining it. I understand that tests alone do not establish compliance or approval. I have published extension 1.1.8 and companion 3.1.6 on GitHub, but have not submitted 1.1.8 to EGO. The new extension ZIP contains no donation metadata or payment images. The companion remains a separately installed, user-level Python program, invoked through a fixed argument array; it does not request root access. Could you advise whether this architecture is acceptable under the Scripts and Binaries rule, and whether there are particular changes needed before another submission? Separately, my four earlier EGO submissions (1.1.1 versions 1–3 and 1.1.2 version 4) contain personal payment QR images which I no longer wish to distribute. Their archived downloads are still publicly accessible, and I cannot find a removal action in the author interface. Could website staff advise how to remove those legacy archives or their payment images and CDN copies? Please let me know the available options before removing the extension or review history. Current release: https://github.com/TengJoe/icon-normalizer-plugin/releases/tag/v1.1.8 Thank you for your time.

Auto-rejected because of new version 1.1.8 (5) was uploaded