[Greasemonkey] Goals for the user script directory (very long)

Jeremy Dunck jdunck at gmail.com
Fri Apr 8 10:18:20 EDT 2005

On Apr 8, 2005 8:54 AM, Scott R. Turner <srt at aero.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> > They can host them anywhere, sorry if I wasn't clear.
> In my opinion, the best service you can provide for this kind of thing
> is reliable hosting.  

The latest version will definitely be available from the directory as
a fallback, and maybe all versions.  If you mean that the directory
should accept direct submissions of scripts (without a source URL),
then there are problems; once posted, how does a new version of that
script get updated?  etc.

>It's not like user scripts are going to take up
> gigabytes of storage or generate huge traffic.  And a lot of these
> machinations you're going through with hashes, etc., to provide trust
> would go away if you simply hosted scripts and let users/reviewers
> submit comments against the scripts.  

It's not like hashing the script will be tough, and letting people
submit comments about scripts is not mutually exclusive with not
directly hosting all scripts.

>You'd probably also get a more
> vibrant and involved community.

Maybe; I think it might be nice to allow people to post a script very
easily (instead of FTP and writing up a blog post to point to it).  I
don't think this is a core feature, though.

I'm interested in arguments against keeping all versions of listed
scripts on userscript.org...

More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list