On 8 фев, 02:59, Lil Devil <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It's telling that out of about 3 million active users of Greasemonkey, > we've only seen a dozen or so users complaining about this change. >> That tells us that very few users (less than 0.001%) have a need to >> edit the list of sites and/or pages a script runs on. > >In fact it doesn't. You don't count all the people that silently >rolled back to the old version, complained on local forums or saw >complaints of others and decided not to install new version etc. There >are 2270 registered people here, 3 of them (>0.1%) are complaining in >this single thread.
Without being adversarial, I'd like to add my voice to those users complaining about the change. >> So let's look at this another way. *Why* do these users need to change >> the @includes? > >I change this for "Black text on white background" script. I apply it >to sites that use white text on black background. This is precisely what I use Greasemonkey for. I have a question, tho: clearly, my version of Greasemonkey (which I *think* is the latest but there seems to be no way to access a version number) has remembered my list of websites for my 'Change text background to gray' script; this script is still active on website I told it to act upon, and only those websites. However, I have no way of accessing the list or change it now that the 'Manage User Scripts' option has been moved into Firefox's 'Add-ons' window. Where are they? -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Manage-User-scripts-tp30852744p30972449.html Sent from the GreaseMonkey List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- 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.
