{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreihtbsijekb6zfu2zjv3kyxtds2rfhm3qdsqaabbgrf2ntsozjblde",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:hqad6xwuzg7oqfmwylfkvqfm/app.bsky.feed.post/3mna4gr3dqhc2"
  },
  "path": "/viewtopic.php?t=33298&p=275051#p275051",
  "publishedAt": "2026-06-01T10:49:55.000Z",
  "site": "http://forum.palemoon.org",
  "tags": [
    "3.7.0"
  ],
  "textContent": "> > Edit: Nevermind, I just decided to release 3.7.0 as a stable release instead of making a second edition of the beta release, since I haven't really made risky changes and the first beta access had no issues with anyone using it.\n>\n> Let's hope that it is indeed stable and won't introduce any new bugs - fingers crossed\n>\n> Well, now I kind of regret not having had a chance to test the beta version, because I have a few comments for 3.7.0 (tested on pm 34.2.2)\n\nI would've definitely wanted to hear your feedback, before releasing 3.7.0 as a stable release, but it's okay - the issues you are mentioning I was already thinking of refining them anyways.\n\nI was thinking of removing \"Get user scripts\" label that does nothing but taking you to a webpage, and maybe make the \"New User Script\" label behave like the one that exist on Violentmonkey, Giving you the choice of either going to Greasyfork or OpenUserJS, or create a userscript on your own - possibly shortening the label to just \"New...\". This will be one of the main steps that I will be taking onto the next stable release of the extension.\n\nI will also see if there's something that can be done with the new search bar that I introduced that, despite it makes a big difference, but the UI could use a bit more refinement (I didn't bother much with the UI refinement as I was more busy in shipping the main feature anyways - I was tackling with the per-script option redesign, during that period anyways).\n\n\n> I would suggest either making the panel two rows, or creating two panels: keep the sorting panel at the top, and move \"new user script\" and so on to a new panel at the bottom of the view-port.\n\nThat is an option that I may experiment with it and see what would be more suitable to go with - Although I'm a bit skeptical on making the panel in two rows, possibly making the page look a bit...bulky.\n\n\n> 2) There are a few issues with the new \"Options\" window:\n> - I saw in the code that you tried to fix the problem of content overflowing the window edges when lines are too long, but it doesn't seem to have worked - here's what I get for the test example\n\nHonestly, that was the one mechanism where I was having a hard time the most in designing. I might just accept the defeat and just put a scroll-side at the bottom, in case if that issue were to happen.\n\n\n> - The \"Pages\" section should be renamed to \"User pages\" or something similar - to more clearly indicate that it's not part of the original script;\n> - The \"disabled this script rules and only use...\" checkbox should be moved from the \"Script-declarated\" section to the \"Pages\" section - this would make more sense from a UI perspective;\n> - In the \"Script-declared\" section, the lists of sites for which the script is enabled are too narrow - any domain longer than 5 characters is simply truncated, and you have to hover over each line to get information that should be available at a glance;\n\nWill do these changes, since what you said do make sense. And yes, I am aware of the domains in the \"Scriot-declared\" section being too narrow, I decided to add a tooltip for them, but I guess this is not a clean-design approach and I should just try not to compact everything in one place and just make tabs for each.\n\n> 4) I would like to ask you to move the text \"gm-recover-orphans\" to the DTD. Regardless of how rarely this link is likely to appear (I saw it three times during testing), leaving untranslatable text in the interface doesn't feel right.\n\nI added this mechanism as a last-second-feature before releasing the extension, because it was an issue that I was facing and I figured that a lot of others might face it as well and they wouldn't know. Wait, you've seen it **three** times?! Whelp, I guess I have to do something about it now, since I never thought it would be this common - I only thought it'll appear like once every new version or something.\n\n\n> Is that everything? I have a couple more feature requests, but those can wait.\n> Oh, one more quick question - are you planning any text updates in the extension anytime soon, or can I create a PR with the translation update?\n\nFeature requests are also welcome into the extension and I would much rather for every single point you'd have or anyone that have for me to just type them all to me - I'm not really fond of releasing a new version of the extension every week and would much rather fix as much as I can in one release and then release a new version, when necessary, every couple of weeks or something.\n\nI am indeed planning some text updates. You are more than welcome to keep up with the updates on the GitHub repo and I'd be incredibly grateful for any contribution that would both make the extension better and give the contributor more comfortability in contributing more in the extension as time goes on.\n\n\n> And thank you so much for taking on greasemonkey support. Even though I made some changes to my local copy, every time I've had to make a major change, I've looked at this pile of disparate code and given up.\n\nEvery single person said that about this black-box of a source code (Myself included), and honestly, if it wasn't for my no-secret usage of Claude explaining to me the architecture of the source code, I would've also gave up or took a lot more time in developing my own fork of it. The good news is, now that I've changed the architecture of the extension, it should be MUCH easier to read, encouraging the people to contribute into the extension.\n\n\nI'll finish my IRL tasks and then I'll continue working on a new version of Greasemonkey for UXP. I'll be adding your feedback on a notepad of mine and I'll tackle these features, once I'm free to do so. Again, make sure to write all of your feedback, either on this forum post or my GitHub \"Issues\" tab and I'll keep having them on a note to tackle them later.\n\n* * *",
  "title": "Add-ons • Re: Working on a Greasemonkey fork for Pale Moon",
  "updatedAt": "2026-06-01T10:49:55.000Z"
}