I’m trying to figure out why LibreWolf isn’t on the browser recommendations because this browser is very focused on Privacy.
I would assume that the reason might be related to the requirements that include auto-update (if somebody from the team could confirm this).
If this is the only reason, I think it’s worth reconsidering, since this page mentions that there’s an (optional) auto-updater in the installation, and given that most users are probably Windows users, and they’ve enabled the Microsoft Store, there’s also that option to auto-update. This is not a problem on macOS and Linux, given that package managers solved it.
The question is why you use this not if. I don’t see a valid reason for it as better options are available. I am asking so you can perhaps change my mind and explain what is offered by librewolf that isn’t done by others.
Actually i think you are mistaken. No PG does not recommend every other tool that does something around privacy. It only recommends the best available.
I think it is not so much that Librewolf is bad (it isn’t) so much as it doesn’t solve any problems that other Browsers on the list (Firefox, Mullvad) don’t already solve.
Librewolf is good for low-effort, or low-knowledge users who value privacy but won’t take the time to inform themselves or configure Firefox manually (more or less the same group that Brave appeals to, but the added selling point of being based on Firefox/Gecko and not-for-profit and none of the bloat and baggage of Brave).
I think the reasoning of the PG team is more or less that everything Librewolf does was and is already possible with Firefox (in fact almost every feature Librewolf enables is a feature that was designed and built by Firefox developers). So the lack of unique upsides, can’t justify the potential downsides of (1) having to trust an additional 3rd party (2) potential to fall behind on updates.
I understand this logic and somewhat agree with it. But I do see a place for Librewolf, Maybe not as a recommendation, but an honorable mention beside Arkenfox. I think for high-knowledge, competent users, Firefox+Arkenfox is slightly better choice than Librewolf, but for less knowledgeable or less motivated users, Arkenfox project and its documentation is not very accessible, so it won’t (and doesn’t intend to) have broad mainstream appeal. I think a short one sentence mention of Librewolf in this context would make sense.
Firefox = decent privacy respecting mainstream browser for a mainstream audience, 2 minutes of point and click configuration and you’ve got a fairly private browser.
Firefox + Arkenfox = Well suited for a primary browser for competent, knowledgeable, motivated users comfortable doing some research and getting their hands dirty.
Mullvad Browser = When privacy + blending in with the crowd is more important than usability/convenience features. Basically what an incognito mode should be but probably not a comfortable fit as the primary browser for most people
Librewolf would fit in a niche between Firefox and Firefox+Arkenfox. It has most of the advantages of FF+AF but isn’t so daunting or tedious for an inexperienced user to configure.