[Greasemonkey] a difference in vision

[chris feldmann]

Wow. *This* thread ran a little off topic. I'd like to reassert the 
sentiment that opened it, namely that greasemonkey userscripts should remain 
scripts and that anyone who wants versions and attribution outside of 
comments should write an extension. They're pretty much the same thing, just 
compressed and with a couple XML files to describe the contents. An intro 
and linklist can be found here:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Dev_:_Extensions#Introduction

For userscripts (and their repository), the goal should be simple, short 
scripts that fix simple, easily describable problems. The repository should 
be searchable, organized by category. You post a script and forget it. If 
you revisit the script to allow for some new functionality or to address 
changes made by the page author, simply repost over the old one. All scripts 
should be open source. That was the opening sentiment and I'm sorry to see 
it got lost in the noise, because it was a valuable correction to the 
"irrational exuberance" manifest on this list. If greasemonky becomes a poor 
man's extension authoring tool, it's lost a lot of its charm, for me at 
least.

Or maybe I should just shut up.

On 5/27/05, Bill Donnelly <donnelly at snowcrest.net> wrote:
> 
> Smalltalk is Evile!
> Always has been, always will be.
> But it was a good exercise in pure OOP design and
> implementation and paved the way for all of the
> good OOP languages and systems we have today.
> Even today I find it kind of icky to program in.
> Maybe it was never given a chance.
> But that could be a good thing. ;o)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Greasemonkey mailing list
> Greasemonkey at mozdev.org
> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/greasemonkey
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mozdev.org/pipermail/greasemonkey/attachments/20050527/f36197bb/attachment.htm