On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Georgi Rusev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Now, if the purpose, functionality or eventually even APIs were the same, > why do we even need Userscripts? > I personally see two major differences. One: Extensions tend to be stable features for the browser. User scripts tend to target a _site_ however, which is less stable, and more likely to change (and require the script to match the change). User scripts are good at being easily edited, in place, until fixed. Two: Being smaller and more targeted, user scripts are delivered differently. You don't need Mozilla/Google/whomever to review your user script before you can distribute it nor approve of it. That said; there's much more overlap today, than when user scripts were new. Some user scripts like Reddit Enhancement Suite became an extension. WebExtensions are easier to author, so there's more places that it makes sense to go straight that route. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "greasemonkey-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greasemonkey-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
