Why submit your MODs to the MOD Database?

This forum is now closed as part of retiring phpBB2.
Forum rules
READ: phpBB.com Board-Wide Rules and Regulations

This forum is now closed due to phpBB2.0 being retired.
User avatar
webmacster87
Former Team Member
Posts: 3758
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 2:30 am
Location: San Mateo, CA
Name: Douglas Bell
Contact:

Post by webmacster87 » Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:39 am

It's not anybody's fault when an update breaks a MOD. When phpBB is updated, it is updated because of a security issue which affects ALL phpBB installations (millions of them), not a couple of phpBB boards which happen to use your MOD. It's no one's fault, but new releases are made out of necessity and it's simply good karma to update along with phpBB.

dcz
Registered User
Posts: 787
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:37 am
Contact:

Post by dcz » Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:48 am

And this is another reason to submit and releasemods, cause if you cannot work on it at some time, user might take care of it and your mod will have become kind of an adult ;)

What is precious in the end if the concept, and to have achieved it, what is left is history.

I think I'll soon go for a first try with the moddb ;)

++

phpBB SEO || phpBB3 SEO Premod || SEO phpBB3
GYM Sitemaps & RSS for phpBB3: GYM Sitemaps & RSS

User avatar
webmacster87
Former Team Member
Posts: 3758
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 2:30 am
Location: San Mateo, CA
Name: Douglas Bell
Contact:

Post by webmacster87 » Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:35 am

Sounds good, dcz. :)

dcz
Registered User
Posts: 787
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:37 am
Contact:

Post by dcz » Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:55 am

hehe,

actually I just did it, but I am pretty sure I was wrong lol.

Oh well, the code and package should be ok, besides I uploaded the named 1.0RC2 where it should be 1.0, I guess you guy do not rename accepted (in case it is off course) version :D

So I guess once it will have been reviewed I'll be good for another submit in every cases.

Arh, never too ready to submit ;)

++

phpBB SEO || phpBB3 SEO Premod || SEO phpBB3
GYM Sitemaps & RSS for phpBB3: GYM Sitemaps & RSS

User avatar
webmacster87
Former Team Member
Posts: 3758
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 2:30 am
Location: San Mateo, CA
Name: Douglas Bell
Contact:

Post by webmacster87 » Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:24 pm

If you realize that you've made a mistake (in version numbering or something else), simply submit an updated package again to the MOD Database. We'll remove the older submission from the queue ourselves, and it saves us time (because it could potentially be one less time we have to validate the MOD).

dcz
Registered User
Posts: 787
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:37 am
Contact:

Post by dcz » Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:26 pm

All right, I do it right now ;)

phpBB SEO || phpBB3 SEO Premod || SEO phpBB3
GYM Sitemaps & RSS for phpBB3: GYM Sitemaps & RSS

PeteMan
Registered User
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:32 pm
Location: UK (Glos)
Contact:

Post by PeteMan » Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:41 pm

Must say I'm on the verge of abandoning attempts to get my mod approved. I know this sounds very ungrateful, as the mod reviewers are reviewing mods in their free time, but I'm am getting so frustrated that each time I submit my mod it is rejected for completely different reasons. Furthermore I have to wait a couple of weeks each time I submit.

Wouldn't it be better if the same person re-reviewed a rejected mod?

Pete
Classified Ads mod for phpBB (demo).
Amazon Store mod for phpBB (demo).

User avatar
Ptirhiik
Registered User
Posts: 7411
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:36 pm
Contact:

Post by Ptirhiik » Thu Sep 14, 2006 7:34 pm

Not necessaraly: more eyes are more chance to find what's wrong.

PeteMan
Registered User
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:32 pm
Location: UK (Glos)
Contact:

Post by PeteMan » Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:58 pm

Ptirhiik wrote: Not necessaraly: more eyes are more chance to find what's wrong.

Not if it makes you so disillusioned that you give up! A few of the review comments are definitely valid but there's a lot that I think the mod team could use their discretion and be a little more tolerant about (particularly when there is no mention of these standards in http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/docs/codingstandards.htm).

E.g.

These tags are left open:

Code: Select all

<img src="{IMG_URL}">

Code: Select all

<input type="submit" name="confirm" value="{L_YES}" class="mainoption">
Please close the tag with ' />'

Code: Select all

<img src="{PAYPAL_LOGO_IMG}" border="0" alt="PayPal"</img>
Should use checked="checked":

Code: Select all

<input name="search_terms" type="radio" value="any" checked />
That's it whinge over. I'll make the changes requested and resubmit.

Pete
Classified Ads mod for phpBB (demo).
Amazon Store mod for phpBB (demo).

User avatar
drathbun
Former Team Member
Posts: 12204
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: TOPICS_TABLE
Contact:

Post by drathbun » Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:16 pm

PeteMan wrote: Should use checked="checked":

I got dinged on that one too. :-) There's nothing that says the code has to be XHTML compliant, and it works just fine without it. But it's a good habit to get used to, I guess.
I blog about phpBB: phpBBDoctor blog
Still using phpbb2? So am I! Click below for details
Image

User avatar
smithy_dll
Former Team Member
Posts: 7630
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Name: Lachlan Smith
Contact:

Post by smithy_dll » Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:00 pm

Valid XHTML tags are part of the subSilver coding standards, thanks for bringing their non-written existance to our attention. I will look into getting this documented.

User avatar
Ptirhiik
Registered User
Posts: 7411
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:36 pm
Contact:

Post by Ptirhiik » Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:27 pm

smithy_dll wrote: Valid XHTML tags are part of the subSilver coding standards
er... No: maybe part of the MOD requirements, but certainly not part of the subSilver coding standard. Else, the dev. team has a lot, lot to do :). subSilver doesn't even come validate HTML 4 standard. Check ie admin/style_edit_body.tpl (and this is only one example, so probably one of the more funy).

User avatar
wGEric
Former Team Member
Posts: 8805
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Friday
Name: Eric Faerber
Contact:

Post by wGEric » Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:37 am

smithy_dll wrote: Valid XHTML tags are part of the subSilver coding standards, thanks for bringing their non-written existance to our attention. I will look into getting this documented.

It's documented.
MOD Database requirements point i wrote: All HTML found within the MOD (templates or php files) needs to be XHTML 1.0 Transitional compliant

Reason for this requirement is so that MODs don't break templates that are XHTML compliant.

90% of the reasons MODs are denied is documented somewhere. We aren't making things up so we can deny MODs. None of us like it when a MOD gets denied multiple times. We try to prevent this by looking for everything but that doesn't happen all the time. We miss things.
Eric

User avatar
webmacster87
Former Team Member
Posts: 3758
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 2:30 am
Location: San Mateo, CA
Name: Douglas Bell
Contact:

Post by webmacster87 » Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:41 am

Exactly what Eric said. Furthermore, coding in proper XHTML keeps your code clean and easy to read, and non-XHTML complaint templates can still use them. XHTML isn't too much harder; there's a nice tutorial at W3Schools which I highly recommend you spend a few minutes to read through.

Josh Yelon
Registered User
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:10 am

Post by Josh Yelon » Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:14 pm

Use checked="checked"!?!?!?

On the mod submission form, there's a little check-box that says, allow the mod team to fix trivial mistakes (Yes/No). I can't believe they wouldn't just fix that themselves. It's got to take longer to send the mod back for a rewrite, than it does to type the string '="checked"'.

Post Reply

Return to “[2.0.x] MOD Writers Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron