Marti Admin

I was hoping to keep this announcement on a more positive note but seeing a few stragglers come in with issues.

  1. If someones licensing is present in a "fork" to here from another site (including this one)... DO NOT REMOVE IT. This is violating their Copyright and Licensing... and also a Terms of Service (TOS) violation. This is immediate grounds for account removal. If you see one of these please Flag for moderation with your proof and it will be investigated. The licensing is there for your attribution as well as continued hosted publishing rights.

  2. If the license header is present and @license does not match that is a TOS violation. I understand that everyone is getting used to this "old" feature here but if a new user (or an older one especially those who are familiar with the @license key from over a decade ago) does this I'll usually make one attempt to get them to fix it in a short period of time... if it merits it. If not the script and possibly the account is eligible for removal.

Please abide by the TOS.


Re: @Marti:

the script editor just refreshes and all the changes are gone.

That gets ones attention real quick that it's definitely user error. Again always the way it has been.

And now it should not be. I've added some preliminary error code pages, which took a few days as you can all see. This is still not finished but it's a start for everyone.

The way the GH webhook works we accept a push request and if it is going to be parsed we do a response of 200. If there is a parsing error we currently have zero way to tell GH that it failed/rejected. I will mull over some thoughts, as I am already doing, for the GH import and see if there is a way of notifying GH but no promises.

Re: @Styx:

but could waste your time in tries to search a bug in wrong places.

Preaching to the choir as the aphorism goes.


Re: @blablubbb:

It would have been nice if you would have simply told me to add such a statement instead of giving no feedback

https://openuserjs.org/announcements/Licensing_enforcement and https://openuserjs.org/about/Terms-of-Service#acceptable-licensing for several years. The abuse by Authors is what forced this validation of what you all were supposed to be doing the whole time. Personally running around to everyone isn't going to happen which is why the Annoucements discussion exist. Read it next time please before you start complaining about your own inability to search.

... and not updating the script.

We prefer not to alter code... that is usually your responsibility.

your own help page ablut this license statement does not yet state that you made it compulsory.

Seems to me that License Type component is required in nice bold letters.

So perhaps you may want to reread those links and spend some quality time understanding them.

Thank you for your cooperation,
OUJS Admin


Re: @Styx:

thanks

Welcome. Solving some of the older issues keeps me from tackling the current site improvements but I'm willing so far.

supports an opinion that rejecting script edit without any error text is not helpful at all.

And I'll remind those who bring this up again of the Terms of Service at https://openuserjs.org/about/Terms-of-Service#etiquette , specifically the "Do my bidding" part and the bullet before that, as well as my third time saying this:

be patient... I'll be adding some more over time. ;)

Because these opinions are treading seriously on the TOS I'm refraining from just removing users at this time. Other Admin+ aren't usually this lenient. Although my patience can be tried especially when people don't read what's already been posted multiple times.

I don't mind answering questions here but I almost missed your issue @Styx because I'm on Development which is where issues like these should be.

Properly presented issues are not complaining about something or forming an opinion. It is using the issue tracker on Development and offering pull requests if you are that impatient.

/adminbox


Re: @Styx:

(it states that MIT should be applied by default)

This is pre @license validation and absolute requirement. MIT is the site default but now everyone must specify it. Those older scripts are still stamped MIT as per the Terms of Service.


So long story short... you were already missing Support and Homepage on your scripts homepage (they are back now)... then I added the storage check yesterday which rejected your script.

Should be good to go now.

Thanks for the report. :)




Hmmm it looks like the sanitizer dep we utilize doesn't like that encoding. :\ This will take a bit to figure out.


Btw we upmix @homepage to @homepageURL... so that is redundant.


Re: @Styx:

What should I do?

These are the culprit:

// @homepage     http://fanfics.me/index.php?section=blogs&search=%23ffme
// @homepageURL  http://fanfics.me/index.php?section=blogs&search=%23ffme
// @supportURL   http://fanfics.me/index.php?section=blogs&search=%23ffme

I'll see if I can get those validations to work with this edge case in a bit.


Re: @vanowm:

On top of that openuserjs also removes @updateURL

I think you are mixing up your sites. That's the other sites requirement not ours.


Re: @vanowm:

@updateURL is actually not removed from installed script, only in source view at website(?)

Is this a question or not? No one but you has removed anything related to that if so.


Re: @vanowm:

It's great for all the other authors save for a few.

Perhaps broadening your authoring skills would be a good thing instead of constant perceived complaining. :)



if @name has changed openuserjs creates a totally new script

Intended behavior.

On top of that openuserjs also removes @updateURL

Not to my knowledge and no it does not.

Any suggestions how to handle name change and let existing users know about it?

That's entirely up to you... you could change the original script to use the new @downloadURL and something to tell them to remove the old.


... but it doesn't...

 

be patient... I'll be adding some more over time. ;)

It never has for any rejections. This isn't the first rejection that we have in. The very first one is absence of @name.

the script editor just refreshes and all the changes are gone.

That gets ones attention real quick that it's definitely user error. Again always the way it has been.




Your @license should be MIT to match not GPL-3.0.

You have a short period before permanent removal to fix this.

Thanks.


adding a message box somewhere

It's been in the TOS for years with everyone agreeing to it and it's actually as a help template for new scripts as a placeholder now but I only have so much time... plus you have announcements which you seem to have found. :)

Before I went away from dev station I started working on a drop box similar to the .meta.js one in Script Author Tools on every script homepage... so that everyone will know what is accepted easier than visiting external sites but ran out of time to finish before I need a break.

So please be patient and there is currently a ton of notices, so no excuses ;), in which I'll be adding some more over time. ;)

Thanks.


$ sha256sum jquery-1.8.3.min.js 
61c6caebd23921741fb5ffe6603f16634fca9840c2bf56ac8201e9264d6daccf  jquery-1.8.3.min.js
$ sha256sum sa.js
ba6eda7945ab8d7e57b34cc5a3dd292fa2e4c60a5ced79236ecf1a9e0f0c2d32  sa.js

Can't do that.