[Greasemonkey] Additional metadata

Mark Pilgrim pilgrim at gmail.com
Wed Apr 13 18:48:53 EDT 2005

On 4/11/05, Jeremy Dunck <jdunck at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 11, 2005 4:40 PM, Aaron Boodman <zboogs at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Similar questions on the other items. What meaning to they have to GM
> > or the repository? Will people be able to search for scripts with
> > license=BSD? I don't see that being very useful.
> Well, I actually disagree here.  I thought Mark's inclusion of license
> info in his script showed a lot of foresight.  If user scripts
> continue to become popular, we can expect claims of piracy and
> copyright to follow.  Right now, a tip of the hat is plenty, but
> someone will claim patent on "//a", that's the ball game.  :-P

The more I think about it, the more an optional @license line would be
incredibly useful.  Many many user scripts I stumble across have no
explicit licensing information at all, meaning that they default to a
strict copyright, which means that I have no rights to reuse code.  I
include explicit licensing information in all my scripts, but sadly
this portion of my templates does not seem to be widely adopted.  A
documented @license line might increase the chances of people spending
5 seconds to think about it.


More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list