On 2011-01-22, at 15:44, esquifit <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Erik Vold <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 13:24, esquifit <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> What would happen after the update 0.8 -> 0.9 with an old script for >>> which the @includes are different in the script code and in >>> config.xml? Which @includes would survive? >> >> The user defined @includes and other @include/@exclude edits remain in the >> config.xml (and continue to be used) until the user edits the user script >> (opening the file and making changes that result in the lastModified >> timestamp to change on the user script) or updates it (installing a new >> version) iirc. > > Thanks for the swift answer. Just to be sure that I understand: > 1) Does this mean that config.xml continues to exist, only that now it > will be (automatically) synced with the script? yes, the 'sync' only happens when a script is changed though, and only for the one script that changed. > 2) If after the upgrade to 0.9 I make a minor edit in a script and > save it, will the @includes in config.xml replace those in the script? no, the @includes in the script replace the ones stored in config.xml > 3) Reinstalling the script would, as usual, overwrite the current @includes yes > Regarding 3: if GM could check any difference in the @in/exclude > headers between the script being installed and the installed one, and > issue a warning in that case, it would be great. An option 'overwrite > @in/excludes or leave current @in/excludes unchanged' would be even better. Make an issue ;) E -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "greasemonkey-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greasemonkey-users?hl=en.
