tampermonkey
tampermonkey | standards-positions | |
---|---|---|
26 | 178 | |
3,898 | 597 | |
2.2% | 0.8% | |
0.0 | 7.6 | |
about 1 month ago | 2 months ago | |
JavaScript | Python | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 only | Mozilla Public License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
tampermonkey
-
Show HN: Sniper: A Manifest V3 web extension for dynamic user specified actions
This extension makes use of JS computed property names to perform user specified dynamic actions on user specified elements.
I started working on an extension primarily for my own very specific use case. I knew of Tampermonkey and it's relatives before, but hadn't used it extensively. I also was following the news of MV3, so wasn't sure of their long term viability. But more than anything having recently got into frontend development I also just wanted to build an extension myself, getting to understand the newer limitation and alternatives was just a bonus point.
Literally a couple of days ago I got to know (From HN nonetheless https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38526277) that userscripts are going to be allowed in MV3 too, so I finally decided to actually check out ViolentMonkey, which is pretty neat, but from the looks of it would have to migrate to `chrome.userScripts.register` which would eventually require `userScripts` permission and with it would need [developer mode enabled](https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/reference/api/u...). While browsing through the subsequent discussions I saw there were many other alternatives for dynamic script execution, from creating and the dynamic code to `` tags to using `evaljs`, but I wasn't aware of them while building this (see for ex: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31425256">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31425256</a> and <a href="https://github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/issues/644#issuecomment-857838249">https://github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/issues/644#issu...</a>) (and tbf it wan't even my goal to get full JS execution in my extension).<p>Long term my goal was to build a small JSON config for the actions needed and parse and apply them to have the desired behavior. I also was planning on exposing some extension only behavior (like tab functionality) via message passing with service workers (The config could be something like
-
If your Firefox suddenly started to hang or become extremely slow today, check if you have tampermonkey 5.0. Disable it for now as it seems to be the culprit.
Do you use "Never Remember History"? There are bug reports about it. Fix is soon to be released.
-
Ever since today my browser stopped working
Yes, I'm having the exact same problem. It was updated on Nov. 30 and I can't find a way to downgrade back to the last version. There's been several issues posted on the tampermonkey github recently but I don't have enough technical knowledge to know if any of those issues applies to this problem. And just like you, I can't even see my scripts to move them to a different script manager.
-
Tampermonkey: Dev Mode will become mandatory for running userscripts in Chromium
I have no damn idea why Tampermonkey, which as very best I can tell is closed source <https://github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/blob/master/REA...>, is on the "blessed" Firefox for Android list when Violentmonkey <https://github.com/violentmonkey/violentmonkey#readme> is MIT, although I readily admit doesn't it have a "politically correct" name
-
How can I create a self hosted tampermonkey?
I use it a lot and it used to be on github until version 2.9. I guess I could use that but wondering if there are some other nice selfhosted versions where I can easily modify my Chrome webpages that I should consider.
-
umm..."Introducing Tam, your helpful assistant", Tampermonkey's v4.19 opt-out (should be opt-in) 'feature'. Thoughts?
I want to chime on that as it's worth noting that Tampermonkey is no longer open source. I mean it's like that for years - its GitHub repo clearly stands it's just an archive version and commits there date back to 2018. Here's one of the first posts when author went proprietary license and started gaining data (with his comment btw) and technically there's also Security section in FAQ and full Privacy Policy. Also FWIK website is the only place you get info about changes - highlighting that to stop looking for insights on GitHub.
-
Tampermonkey extension
If you can't the answers you're looking for in the Tampermonkey FAQ, you can ask them in the official Tampermonkey support forum.
-
Weird cookie behavior
Tampermonkey devs have implemented it but didn't release it yet and Violentmonkey devs don't want to implement it, so I guess I'm not fixing this issue anytime soon.
-
badfilter with dynamic filters?
Specific case: uBlock Origin seems to block TamperMonkey from either injecting or running my userscript. (See https://github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/issues/1709 ) I was thinking it might be one of the above rules but I can't really get much out of the logger, and trying to disable those rules doesn't work. Does anyone have an idea on how to progress?
-
Firefox Android now supports tampermonkey
https://github.com/Tampermonkey/tampermonkey/blob/master/COP...
this says GPL so unless they update their license file here, this stays
standards-positions
-
iOS404
You can check why Mozilla and Apple have opted to not support this.
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/154
https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/28
Neither Mozilla or Webkit are satisfied that the proposal is safe by default, and contains footguns for the user that can be pretty destructive.
-
Show HN: DualShock calibration in the browser using WebHID
FWIW Mozilla updated their position on Web Serial API to "neutral" and clarified that they might be okay with enabling the API with an add-on.
https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#webserial
Allowing serial but not HID would be really strange. With HID you get standard identifiers that let you filter out devices that are too dangerous for the web. With serial you get nothing. Even if you know a device is dangerous, there's no way to protect users from it.
-
Tailwind CSS v4.0.0 Alpha
Hasn't FireFox been dragging their asses on @scope? https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/472
It took years to just convince them of the need for it. And I'm not sure anyone got convinced vs Chrome had already shipped it and Safari has it planned so they caved in.
Hard to believe FireFox used to be a leader of the modern web.
-
An HTML Switch Control
As mentioned by others, OK idea, but not a fan that this isn't standardized. After a quick search+peruse, these seem to indicate that it's not around the corner either. Happy (/hope) to be corrected.
https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4180
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/990
-
Platform issues which disadvantage Firefox compared to first-party browsers
Mozilla's position on these specs is nicely outlined publicly and transparently as part of their standards-positions project: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/100
I'm kinda glad it's not implemented in my browser, to be honest, because the whole thing seems like a security nightmare.
It's a shame it impacts some hobby usecases, but I don't think this outweighs the reasoning set out on the GitHub issue.
-
What Progressive Web App (PWA) Can Do Today
This should have big warnings on it. Some of these are not web standards; they are features implemented unilaterally by Google in Blink that have been explicitly rejected by both Mozilla and Apple on privacy and security grounds.
Take Web Bluetooth, for example:
Mozilla:
> This model is unsustainable and presents a significant risk to users and their devices.
— https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#web-bluetooth
Apple:
> Here are some examples of features we have decided to not yet implement due to fingerprinting, security, and other concerns, and where we do not yet see a path to resolving those concerns
— https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention/
This is Microsoft’s Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish bullshit applied to the web platform by Google. Google keeps implementing these things despite all other major rendering engines rejecting them, convinces people that they are part of the web, resulting in sites like this, then people start asking why Firefox and Safari are “missing functionality”. These are not part of the web platform, they are Google APIs that have been explicitly rejected.
-
Why Are Tech Reporters Sleeping on the Biggest App Store Story?
Is BLE a PWA requirement? I think they explained their position pretty well here, regardless of whether I agree:
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/95#iss...
-
Reason to Use Firefox Is Sync That Works
I took a glance at Can I Use what the difference between the last public release of Firefox and Chrome is [1] and they don't really have that big of a difference in the eyes of normal use-cases? Some of these aren't implemented purely because of privacy reasons, the proposals aren't finished yet or complexity [2].
Why would Firefox need to change to Chromium engine? The only websites I notice that don't work with Firefox is because of user-agent targetting or just putting 5-second time-outs in Youtube code on non-chrome webbrowsers [3].
Can you give some examples of websites not working on Firefox?
[1] https://caniuse.com/?compare=chrome+120%2Cfirefox+121&compar...
[2] https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/
[3] https://www.neowin.net/news/youtube-seemingly-intentionally-...
- Mozilla's Position on CSS Scope
-
CSS Is Fun Again
Mozilla are dragging their heels on @scope:
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/472
https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/implement-css-scope-rul...
Someone who clearly didn't get it was wasting three years time "well actually"ing everything. The latest news is "it's worth prototyping". Meanwhile Chrome has released it(steam rolled?) and Safari has it in tech preview.
I question if FireFox has the resources to keep up with the pace of the modern web.
What are some alternatives?
violentmonkey - Violentmonkey provides userscripts support for browsers. It works on browsers with WebExtensions support.
webcontainer-core - Dev environments. In your web app.
uBlock - uBlock Origin - An efficient blocker for Chromium and Firefox. Fast and lean.
WHATWG HTML Standard - HTML Standard
json-rules-engine - A rules engine expressed in JSON
wpt - Test suites for Web platform specs — including WHATWG, W3C, and others
chrome-extensions-samples - Chrome Extensions Samples
firefox-ios - Firefox for iOS
browser_extension - A browser extension that redirects popular sites to alternative privacy friendly frontends
WebKit - Home of the WebKit project, the browser engine used by Safari, Mail, App Store and many other applications on macOS, iOS and Linux.
libredirect - A browser extension that redirects popular sites to alternative privacy friendly frontends [Moved to: https://github.com/libredirect/browser_extension]
Fakeflix - Not the usual clone that you can find on the web.