Compatibility with GreaseMonkey / TamperMonkey userscripts

[shinzlet]

Oildrop does not currently expose any of GreaseMonkey's GM_ functions, nor does it use a metadata block. This makes it incompatible with scripts that use those features, which is a real disadvantage to certain users. My gut says that only massive userscripts would need the GM_ functions, as most style tweaks / functionality improvements don't require external assets or local storage (1).

Advantages:

• Prevents fragmentation of the userscript community
  • I don't foresee this being a massive problem. Currently, Oildrop offers no method to distribute userscripts
  • Allows Oildrop users to use GreaseMonkey scripts

Disadvantages:

• Increases size of codebase
• Might be tone-deaf?
  • Oildrop is targeted at security and privacy conscious users. Personally, I don't think many of those users will be interested in installing large userscripts from third parties. (Tell me if you disagree - I don't want to generalize!)

1: Note that Oildrop can still do all of those things - you'll just have to do them the standard javascript way.

[afontenot]

I recently filed an issue with several feature suggestions (https://github.com/shinzlet/oildrop/issues/5) and I wanted to add a clarification to this issue: certain functions in the GM API implement things that can only be done with the privileged access that the extension has. In particular, GM.xmlHttpRequest can make requests that are not subject to the cross-origin request restrictions applied by a host's CORS headers.

[shinzlet]

Discussed a bit in #5 - I'll leave this open as it's probably the most important potential new feature with respect to growth.