Marti Admin

Re: @Marti:

... Application wise that is looking... we'll still look at all script source to find malware if it exists in everyones script.




Re: @dluciv:

btw @copyright and @license have been around since at least 2005... so almost a decade... so it shouldn't break anything anywhere. Closing issue. Thanks. :)


Re: @dluciv:

And now you are confusing me by what you say versus what you did... you fixered it. :) :P


Re: @dluciv:

It is ok.

As it stands now you are still unlisted because of it. Eventually everything will be validated and your script will eventually be sent to the graveyard because of this. I recommend strongly at this to follow the guidelines I mentioned. It's not being parsed properly due to user error of the license key. I thought I'd work with you before I removed it... another Moderator or higher role can still remove you. Your choice.


Re: @TimidScript:

Is there a way to get the actual number of people who voted

I stand corrected... we have a CSS glitch that "hides" the number of votes... it's in the DOM with the "grey" bar. I'll need to spend some more quality time with this portion to diagnose what is going on here. I can understand your confusion too.


Re: @jscher2000:

In the context of this site, this does seem to be a kind of discussion filter. I'm not sure if there is a specific issue open for it. #199...

Could be related. I'll do what I can when I can to implement something down the line... however there are currently some more pressing matters at the moment that are out of my control at the moment. Since you have a whole four scripts here to check it doesn't seem to be too terribly lengthy, at the moment, to check those... but I understand where you are going with this request.

Re: @TimidScript:

Is there a way to get the actual number of people who voted...

It is currently a summation of up and downs... so in short no... and in long is the community trending one way or the other with your script... see below color references.

as then it will give you a more accurate picture of the rating of the script.

Seems more like a stalking type option. ;)... because I can foresee the next request on saying "who did it" e.g. blame.

list the number of open issues on the scripts listing, instead of clicking on the script page to find out the number

Perhaps... that is another possible query option. :)

does the Rating's gray bar represent anything else?

Which grey?

You can currently use the following logic:

  • light grey = fuzzy with your script e.g. room for improvement possibly.
  • dark grey = doing well with your script from the community.
  • red = you have a more serious issue with your script that OUJS has identified.

Re: @dluciv:

I have changed it...

How about trying this for your metadata block? (so it gets correctly parsed):

// ==UserScript==
// @name          Everlasting Juick
// @namespace     http://dluciv.name/
// @description   Everlasting Juick scrolling / Бесконечный скроллинг Жуйка
// @author        dluciv
// @copyright     2014+, Dmitry V. Luciv
// @license       WTFPLv2; http://wtfpl.net
// @license       MIT; http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
// @version       0.0.3.4
// @icon          https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dluciv/UserScripts/master/juick.com/everlasting-juick.png
// @homepage      https://github.com/dluciv/UserScripts/tree/master/juick.com
// @updateURL     https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dluciv/UserScripts/master/juick.com/everlasting-juick.meta.js
// @downloadURL   https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dluciv/UserScripts/master/juick.com/everlasting-juick.user.js
//
// @grant         GM_info
//
// @require       http://code.jquery.com/jquery-2.1.1.min.js
// @include       http://juick.com/*

// ==/UserScript==

Referencing the general MIT template url on OSI is "okay" however usually the url is a pointer to your specific MIT License with your copyright info. @copyright covers this in the metadata block but some choose to point it to a custom MIT license file elsewhere.



Re: @jscher2000:

The current state of all of our issues can be found at https://github.com/OpenUserJs/OpenUserJS.org/issues just like the other guy has his. I'm still personally contemplating your request and comparing to existing structures. USO never had the ability you are asking for... however notifications are probably an area to concentrate on soon though. There is a saying of getting it done versus getting it done right... I prefer to think that OUJS is choosing the latter. There are also some stalling issues with GM, and the rest of the user.js engines right now, but hopefully those will be milestone complete later this month that will affect everyone.




Re: @anomieintheusa:

I am investigating the issue.

What user.js engine uses this in the metadata block?

// @run-at         window-load

I'm pretty sure the only valid values commonly supported are only document-end (usually implied if absent) and document-start.


Auto liking in a script that is advertising new emoticons is a violation of the TOS.

Your script is now eligible for removal


One other quickie too...

// @downloadURL    https://openuserjs.org/install/yasingedik/Aol_Reader_Optimized.user.js
// @updateURL      https://openuserjs.org/install/yasingedik/Aol_Reader_Optimized.meta.js

... This is not really necessary anymore especially on OUJS (here) but if you wish to keep it in there one of them needs to be modified so you don't kill updating.

// @downloadURL    https://openuserjs.org/install/yasingedik/Aol_Reader_Optimized.user.js
// @updateURL      https://openuserjs.org/meta/yasingedik/Aol_Reader_Optimized.meta.js

The user.js engines out there handle updating automatically now by trying to see if the meta routine exists first... in our case here on OUJS we focus on using the header not the .meta.js extension.

Hope some of this helps you out. :)


Been seeing this particular here a lot lately...

Rather than having Greasemonkey (the user.js engine) create dozens if not hundreds of <style> tags with code such as yours, from this snippet:

GM_addStyle(".header-search-wrap { margin-top: 0px !important;}");
GM_addStyle(".dropdown-menu-add .page-container {height: 498px !important;}");
GM_addStyle(".dropdown-menu-add {height: 500px !important; left: -50px !important; max-height: 500px !important;}");

// The rest of your CSS rules in here too e.g. ...

it might run more efficiently in the DOM if you only use GM_addStyle minimally like this:

GM_addStyle(
  [
   ".header-search-wrap { margin-top: 0px !important;}",
   ".dropdown-menu-add .page-container {height: 498px !important;}",
   ".dropdown-menu-add {height: 500px !important; left: -50px !important; max-height: 500px !important;}"
   // The rest of your CSS rules in here too e.g. ...

  ].join("\n")
);

Just a suggestion. :)


Re: @dluciv:

Btw if you get some time you can read up on the Tivo fiasco with GPL v2 versus v3 and you can see why GPL exists. It's on the web.


Re: @dluciv:

Can userscript have multiple licenses?

Yes Mozilla has tri-licensing e.g. 3 that can operate. MIT is the least restrictive but the least protective as well. GPL is the most restrictive but the most protective... and then everything in between of course. I also dual license with GPL and CC. GPL covers Code and CC covers Content. Still keeps the Code free for reuse and adaptation. :)

The problem is that not all courts worldwide recognize every public domain. If someone were to prove that WTFPL is a Content only license then the MIT Code License can be applied with arbitration via our TOS e.g. Creative Commons (except no derivatives) is that.

Very sad that WTFPL is not OSI-approved.

It's a difficult situation for those not wanting attribution but you might try petitioning OSI to get it added.


There have been a few Userscripts.org (USO) clones popping up. The only one that I am somewhat familiar with is from USO at http://userscripts-mirror.org/.

Any others I suggest being very careful especially if they advertise logins.




Re: @BitTorrentse:

The @license looks well... but now your @copyright is not stating that it's you. :\ e.g. you aren't advertising yourself with copyright status.

You might want to consider using:

// @copyright     2014+, Bit Torrentse (http://www.absba.org)

in your scripts for that.

You'll need to make any necessary changes on GitHub too since that is the main repo file for one of your other scripts. If you sync GitHub to here it will overwrite these changes on OpenUserJS.org. I don't think that you want that to happen. :)


Re: @BitTorrentse:

I remove it

The least restrictive license is MIT.

So you could change your metadata block from:

// @license    Bit Torrentse , http://www.absba.org

to

// @license    MIT

You already have a reference to your forum site in @copyright although it may need a little improvement.


Re: @BitTorrentse:

I remove it

The least restrictive license is MIT.

So you could change your metadata block from:

// @license    Bit Torrentse , http://www.absba.org

to

// @license    MIT

You already have a reference to your forum site in @copyright although it may need a little improvement.