But like we've said numerous times, these things are critical in phpBB. Most of the suggested additions are what -you- want and not what everyone -needs-.
I definitely don't use quick reply, shoutbox or file attachments on any of my forums. Quick reply is one mod I do see used a fair bit, but again, it's such an easy to install mod... why do you -need- it installed in the default phpBB?
Ok, so I'm reading a lot of disagreement even among the defenders of the developers, but I'm going to assume this is part of developer policy anyway.
Wants and needs. What is defined as needs? Security updates and bug fixes, I assume. What about usability? Anti-spammer measures? Administration and moderation abilities?
I would think that anything that makes the core forum more useable (or, in the case of anti-spammer measures, at least prevents it from becoming less useable) should be counted among "needs". I think when there are complaints from hundreds and possibly even thousands of users (and that's just those who do bother to register here to complain) about daily spambot registrations, there is a problem with the whole system.
I can see a reason for keeping out cash mods and attachment mods and I think it's disappointing that this topic was started by someone who asked for an attachment mod built-in because it opened up the possibility of this whole strawman argument about features that allows one side to lump "everything" in with new functionality like that. There is a world of difference between adding totally new functionality and adding functionality that makes the existing
feature set easier to use. I'm talking about functionality like many of the things I mentioned in my first post in this topic. Why is something like "report this post" not considered a security feature when, depending on the size of the user's board, a blatantly offensive post could be left to stand for days? Why is this sort of problem not treated as seriously?
To the easymod comment, I'm aware that some mods can cause conflicts with other mods. But you're a programmer, as you said, even doing it manually it shouldn't be too hard. Use easymod to install the big mods, attachments, hierarchy, etc. Install the easy smaller mods by hand. Should be easy enough.
This is what frustrates me the most. I am NOT a programmer. But I administer a phpBB board because no one else will do it and I believe that my board is essential to the greater community I serve. Yet all the responses I get are of this type - that I should be expected to be a programmer to effectively manage and update my board. Even to update the core system this is expected, and it is ridiculous. I never dreamed that I would be expected to fish though source code independantly and on my own, track down changes made by mods to reconcile that with changes the update needs to make (because you can't design software that can handle that!) and perform updates to this board manually. Again, it is why I am switching to a board that has the features I need built-in and doesn't force me to modify code (and know how to modify code) just to update to the latest version.
MODs are not added to phpBB2. Period.
Features have been added to phpBB3, but not from published MOD code. The codebase for 3 is so totally different that none of the MOD code published for 2 would work anyway.
The former statement misses the concern it is meant to address. That concern is not that someone else's MOD gets added to the codebase, but that the functionality it adds might get added. I think everyone expects that for a feature to be added that it be in the development team's own code so they can ensure that it is integrated with the existing code.
It would be more useful for the debate to simply stop saying the former and explain the latter. It clears up a lot of confusion
Is phpBB2 open source? Yes. Does that mean you can do whatever you want with it? Absolutely, other than removing the copyright.
Does that mean you can ask... cajole... request... demand that certain things be done by the phpBB Group. No, it does not.
This is a rather disturbing statement. You don't really mean this, do you? Of course we can make demands and requests. That is what is occurring in this thread, which so far you, as a moderator, have permitted.
Now, if the development team's policy is simply to ignore any feedback from their userbase, this would be good to know, because I would rather avoid a product that shows as little change as phpBB because the developers show no interest in responding to their customers.
On a personal note: there are MODs out there (both on other sites and here in the MOD-DB at phpbb.com) that have (in my opinion) very inefficient code. The MOD Team does a great job of validating for syntax and possible security holes. But they do not - and should not be required to - try to optimize the code. If it works as advertised and follows the coding guidelines then it gets in the DB.
The phpBB3 developer team does have to carefully consider how things are secured, and how they function, but also how they integrate and perform. They're not creating a collection of MODs, they're creating an entire system. Imagine how impossible phpBB would be to support if it operated in an "open development" environment, where anyone and everyone could check in code for whatever purpose they wanted. What a mess that would be! Would phpBB be where it is today in that sort of environment? No, clearly it would not. I absolutely believe that it is where it is today because phpBB2 has a nice solid "protected" base of code, and because there is an enthusiastic and active MODder community that has worked to provide customized features that can be added on as desired.
This I think misunderstands our arguments again. We don't want the development team to simply slap a bunch of MODs into phpBB2 and call it phpBB 2.0.22. We want the development team to give us more features in the core product, features that have been implemented only by means of sloppy MODs in the past. We want the development team to say "Oh, this feature is really important to making our product something our customers can use without getting frustrated with it. Why don't we write
it into our code?" Again, I haven't seen anyone ask for the development team to slap a user-created MOD or someone else's code into the core product.