Consider updating the Greasemonkey listings on PM and Basilisk add-on pages

Add-ons for Pale Moon and other applications
General discussion, compatibility, contributed extensions, themes, plugins, and more.

Moderators: FranklinDM, Lootyhoof

User avatar
andyprough
Forum staff
Forum staff
Posts: 1574
Joined: 2020-05-31, 04:33

Consider updating the Greasemonkey listings on PM and Basilisk add-on pages

Post by andyprough » 2026-06-20, 19:09

Pale Moon user @sinfulosd has done a fantastic job of bringing a fork of the Greasemonkey extension for Pale Moon and Basilisk to feature parity with modern versions of other mainstream userscript managers. Both Pale Moon and Basilisk link to this newer version by @sinfulosd on their respective extension pages.

However, both Pale Moon and Basilisk are also still linking to the older version of Greasemonkey for Pale Moon from 2018 that is unmaintained and does not have feature parity with modern userscript managers. This is probably contributing to a number of Pale Moon and Basilisk users not updating to the newer, maintained version, and missing out on a number of features (if not security fixes).

I recommend de-listing the older version from 2018 on both the Pale Moon and Basilisk extension pages so that more users now migrate to the new, maintained version. If anyone still wants to use the older version for some reason, they can still easily find it with a web search for 'github greasemonkey for pale moon'.

User avatar
sinfulosd
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 106
Joined: 2022-07-13, 03:01

Re: Consider updating the Greasemonkey listings on PM and Basilisk add-on pages

Post by sinfulosd » 2026-06-21, 15:57

andyprough wrote:
2026-06-20, 19:09
they can still easily find it with a web search for 'github greasemonkey for pale moon'.
Even easier, they could just access the fork from my GitHub page, since my project was built on top of it.

But according to the website's team page, the add-ons team members are moonbat and FranklinDM and they're the ones who worked on adding my extension as an external link in the addons site of Pale Moon. When I saw that they put my extension right below the old fork instead of replacing it, I didn't question that decision (partly because I was still working on many corners of the extension, including the compatibility side and changing the entire extension architecture).

The main issue I have with the old fork being present is that some users here would write a userscript that would be compatible with the old fork, but not 100% compatible with the new fork, making people feel divided here and adding more inconvenience on the end-user.

But we can wait for other people's feedback on this post, be it some other users to weigh in their opinion or Pale Moon's addons team weighing in as well. :)
Windows 11
Pale Moon 34.3.0, Firefox 151.0.3, Ungoogled Chromium 148.0
Developing and maintaining Greasemonkey for UXP