[Greasemonkey] UI idea

Aaron Boodman zboogs at gmail.com
Tue Apr 5 02:21:07 EDT 2005

Now I realize what you meant I think -- that it's hard to lookup
scripts that match by URL.

Maybe we could cheat a little. Associate scripts in del.icio.us with a
specific domain, or the special * domain. GM finds all scripts that
match the current domain and the all domain, and then does the pattern
matching itself.

We could cache the results to avoid overloading del.icio.us. Though I
wonder how much it would help. Depends on the distribution of people's
browsing across unique domains.

Jeremy, had you given any thought to this?


On Apr 5, 2005 12:08 AM, Aaron Boodman <zboogs at gmail.com> wrote:
> > - Why a browser-high bar when all the information is contained in an icon?
> Good point. Originally I was going to do something with that space,
> but I scrapped it.
> > - How're you going to determine which scripts are available for this
> > page?  You don't want to make a request to some central server per
> > page, but the only other option is to cache all possible script
> > @includes.
> The idea was del.icio.us. I hadn't considered performance. Probably
> Joshua wouldn't appreciate every gm install hitting his site every
> page load.
> What do you mean by "cache all possible script includes"?
> > - I can't help but think replicating the extension manager is
> > duplicated effort, but I can't propose anything better.  (Can you make
> > Greasemonkey into a tool that autogenerates extensions or something?)
> I don't intend to duplicate extension manager, except by stealing a
> tiny bit of it's visual language. GM won't support autoupdate,
> versioning, etc, etc.
> Autogenerating extensions is an idea that has been considered quite
> often, but I keep coming back to the idea that extensions just feel
> heavy and non-hackable. I want you to be able to just open the sidebar
> and start writing.

More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list