6 ms·

That's all true, but dotjs is only for Google Chrome on OS X. Google Chrome on OS X has no such filesystem-based model for managing scripts.

• wahnfrieden 15y ago
  True, and this is why I love dotjs. Thanks for making it! Maybe a good followup project would be to use some of the dotjs code to help make a filesystem-based GreaseMonkey system for Chrome, which would be just as easy to manage as dotjs scripts are.
• seanp2k 15y ago
  So actually it's much worse than Greasemonkey. Also, with GM you can just save the script with the same filename and it'll use that instead. This project is 100% useless.
  • dasil003 15y ago
    Unless you don't use Firefox and you tend to have a lot of dot files that you hack around with in your home directory. Then it starts to seem pretty awesome.
    • scrrr 15y ago
      Chrome runs Greasemonkey-scripts, too. They are automatically converted to extensions in the background. Works very well. ( http://blog.chromium.org/2010/02/40000-more-extensions.html http://blog.chromium.org/2010/02/40000-more-extensions.html ) But I wouldn't call this useless. It's just another approach.
• ericmoritz 15y ago
  You know that once a user script is installed in chrome you can edit the script.js file in the extension's directory on the fly. It's a little more work than simply putting a file in ~/.js but it doesn't require a HTTP server to function.