Download websites that use jQuery DevBridge Autocomplete

About jQuery DevBridge Autocomplete

jQuery DevBridge Autocomplete does one thing. The plugin turns a text input into a suggestion box, locally or against a server, and then gets out of the way. A plugin that narrow is never a strategic decision. It arrives because a developer needed typeahead on a search field before the end of the afternoon, dropped in a script tag, and moved on to the next ticket.

That casual origin is what makes the plugin worth tracking rather than ignoring. First published in 2012 under an MIT licence and written in plain JavaScript, it belongs to the jQuery era of front end work, when adding a feature meant adding a file and the file stayed until somebody rebuilt the page. Sites still serving it are, with few exceptions, sites whose front end has not been rebuilt since.

As of October 2026 we find jQuery DevBridge Autocomplete on 984 sites, and the version spread says more than the total does. We have recorded 15 distinct versions in the wild, 1.4.11 among those that keep appearing, while the project itself has been quiet for a long stretch. A dependency that stops moving does not disappear from the web. A dependency that stops moving gets copied into the next theme, the next template, the next agency handover, and it keeps shipping to browsers long after anyone consciously chose it.

Detection here is more inferential than it is for a server or a hosted service, and the difference should be stated rather than glossed over. The plugin is a client side file, so we can identify it when it is served as a recognisable script and when its markup conventions survive into the rendered page. Build pipelines that concatenate and minify an entire front end into one bundle erase both signals. Our figure therefore undercounts, and it undercounts unevenly: modern toolchains hide the plugin, older hand assembled pages expose it. The visible population is skewed towards precisely the kind of site a researcher usually wants, which is convenient, but a convenient skew is still a skew.

Two kinds of reader use a list like this. Security and maintenance teams want an inventory of live pages carrying an unmaintained client side dependency, because an abandoned plugin is a slow risk rather than an urgent one, and slow risks are only manageable at list scale. Agencies and platform vendors want the same file for the opposite reason, as a map of sites overdue for the rebuild they sell. Both readings need the whole set at once. Checking a single domain tells you a fact about that domain. The export tells you the size and the shape of a market that nobody maintains.