The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Do not post support requests, bug reports or feature requests. Discuss phpBB here. Non-phpBB related discussion goes in General Discussion!
Scam Warning
Pony99CA
Registered User
Posts: 4783
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Hollister, CA
Name: Steve
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Pony99CA » Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:01 pm

Pony99CA wrote:I would have also called him out for not giving a list of "essential" features that myBB had that phpBB was lacking (beyond the plug-in system and a better warning/banning system -- the latter of which isn't "essential" to me as I'm the only moderator/admin of my board).
Am I the only one still waiting for a list of "essential" features that myBB has that phpBB is lacking? I am curious as to what features (beyond the two mentioned above) are worth going to the trouble of converting your board to get.

Note that I am not asking for a feature-by-feature comparison of myBB vs. phpBB. I just want to know what the OP considers essential features that phpBB is lacking.

Steve
Silicon Valley Pocket PC (http://www.svpocketpc.com)
Creator of manage_bots and spoof_user (ask me)
Need hosting for a small forum with full cPanel & MySQL access? Contact me or PM me.

Malphas
Registered User
Posts: 129
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:13 pm

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Malphas » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:39 pm

Oleg wrote:See the 30 page falling behind topic for an in-depth analysis of both this problem and its solutions. Do you have anything new to add to the conversation?
One could be forgiven for not being aware of that topic, considering it's now on page six due to being locked while the conversation was still active (which I'd argue could only be justified if it was a result of you and callumacrae bickering over your personal disagreements rather than the general sentiment of the thread itself).

It's pretty obvious the topic of phpBB's stunted development is just going to rear its head over and over regardless of how many times you lock threads related to it, since it's of concern to many users (as the 30 pages in the "falling behind" topic demonstrates).

Pony99CA
Registered User
Posts: 4783
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Hollister, CA
Name: Steve
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Pony99CA » Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:36 am

Malphas wrote:
Oleg wrote:See the 30 page falling behind topic for an in-depth analysis of both this problem and its solutions. Do you have anything new to add to the conversation?
One could be forgiven for not being aware of that topic, considering it's now on page six due to being locked while the conversation was still active (which I'd argue could only be justified if it was a result of you and callumacrae bickering over your personal disagreements rather than the general sentiment of the thread itself).
Oh, don't start that again. It got locked -- get over it already.

Anyway, it's less forgivable when you realize that Tabitha mentioned the "phpBB Falling Behind" topic on page 4 of this topic and I linked to it on page 5 (three separate posts in that topic, no less). So there's not much excuse for not being aware of the topic if you've been reading this one.

If somebody wants to discuss how features get added to phpBB, I started the How Do Features Make It Into A Release? topic as an off-shoot of the "falling behind" topic.

To be fair, Beach did add something new, though -- the suggestion that phpBB "merge" with (or get taken over by) another project.

Steve
Silicon Valley Pocket PC (http://www.svpocketpc.com)
Creator of manage_bots and spoof_user (ask me)
Need hosting for a small forum with full cPanel & MySQL access? Contact me or PM me.

User avatar
DionDesigns
Registered User
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:22 pm
Location: Uncertain due to momentum.
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by DionDesigns » Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:01 am

CaNNon_ wrote:
NoScript Featured

The best security you can get in a web browser!
Allow active content to run only from sites you trust, and protect yourself against XSS and Clickjacking attacks.
Rated 5 out of 5 stars (1,058) 2,183,573 users
I think it's a may be a little more than .05%, and I'm only showing one way to do it.
Thing is if I like the site I'll give it script permissions but if I can't see it, I'm going to move on to the next hit in google.

You can't compare it to css, exploits are very real in this case and can be proven just by posting a url.
Sorry I missed this post...I would have responded much sooner.

The number you quoted is bogus, and I suspect you know that. It represents the total number of downloads from addons.mozilla.org over the entire 6-year history of the product. Site-level script blocking has lost favor in the past couple years due to it being much too aggressive, with script-level blocking (such as in Adblock Plus) becoming more commonplace. For that reason, I'd be interested to know just how many of those downloads have occurred in the past two years. And for what it's worth, I use Adblock Plus with a filter set I wrote myself, and I feel safe browsing the vast WWW without having to put on a tinfoil hat and worry whether the next site I visit is going to hijack my computer and find a way to steal my identity. :lol:

Besides...if this topic has proven anything, it's that phpBB3 has been built with security in mind. Do you really believe phpBB3 is vulnerable to clickjacks and XSS exploits?

And I guess that was my point. I cannot understand why phpBB3, with all its security, is so worried about exploits that the developers have intentionally not added great javascript-based features. It can't be because they have listened to a few people with tinfoil-hat tendencies who are scared to look at an unfamiliar site if it contains javascript.....or can it?

I should add now that I hope the developers, when they finally decide to use javascript, don't overreact and go to the opposite end of the spectrum -- meaning, excessive use of jQuery and jQuery plugins. jQuery is meant as a helper, not as a replacement for javascript, and I've seen far too many sites that are slug-slow due their excessive use of jQuery and its plugins.

User avatar
/a3
Registered User
Posts: 411
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:08 am
Location: /dev/random

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by /a3 » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:11 am

DionDesigns wrote:It can't be because they have listened to a few people with tinfoil-hat tendencies who are scared to look at an unfamiliar site if it contains javascript.....or can it?
Security is not the only reason for disabling JavaScript. You will find that I'm also an accessibility advocate.

I don't believe I ever said I would oppose addition of JavaScript by the way. In fact, I'm all for it. On the condition, of course, that an appropriate fallback is provided.
$ git commit -m "YOLO"

CaNNon_
Registered User
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:07 am

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by CaNNon_ » Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:56 am

/a3 wrote:
DionDesigns wrote:It can't be because they have listened to a few people with tinfoil-hat tendencies who are scared to look at an unfamiliar site if it contains javascript.....or can it?
Security is not the only reason for disabling JavaScript. You will find that I'm also an accessibility advocate.

I don't believe I ever said I would oppose addition of JavaScript by the way. In fact, I'm all for it. On the condition, of course, that an appropriate fallback is provided.
Exactly a3 it's all about allowing the user choices, no question the use of scripts are good. Just because we have a site on the web doesn't mean everyone will just trust us.

Son of a Beach
Registered User
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:36 am
Location: Tasmania
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Son of a Beach » Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:24 pm

Oleg wrote:
Son of a Beach wrote: I'm not happy with a board that has released very nearly zero new features since about 2008 (when did phpBB 3.0 come out?).
And yet, 4 years later in 2012 there are plenty of reasons to choose it over competing software.
Yes, every different competing software has good reasons to be chosen. In the end the choice is up to the chooser. Hmmm... not sure if either of us is saying anything significant there.
(By the way, "very nearly zero new features" is not an accurate statement.)
No joke. "very nearly" is clearly subjective, and therefore is not strictly accurate and neither is it innaccurate. However, as a subjective statement is intended, I do think that it accurately reflects the feelings of a large number of phpBB users.
Son of a Beach wrote: it is a real problem and anybody who says otherwise really does have their head buried in the sand, or is otherwise blinded by their allegiances or points of view.
See the 30 page falling behind topic for an in-depth analysis of both this problem and its solutions. Do you have anything new to add to the conversation?
Yes. See the original post in this topic. :-) To summarise (in case you missed it) I think phpBB is too phpBB-focussed at the expense of being user-focussed. It's not necessarily 'wrong' or 'bad', but it's not want I want and I suspect most users would prefer user-focus. I think that one example of being 100% user focussed could be what I proposed in the original post.
Son of a Beach wrote:As for your "features at the expense of quality" phrase, I personally think that features is PART OF quality. Ie, a quality product has a good set of features.
Redefining facts to further your argument is a time-honored tradition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_quality
Now you appear to be attacking me and my use of the English language rather than the actual topic. Very poor form. But in any case, the definition of 'quality' in my dictionary is: the degree of excellence of something.

So you've got your definition from Wikipedia, I've used the word as I always saw fit without looking it up, but now when I do look it up I find that my dictionary matches my use of the word. So what?

At least now we know what each other means. Thanks for the lesson.
Last edited by Son of a Beach on Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:34 pm, edited 5 times in total.

Son of a Beach
Registered User
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:36 am
Location: Tasmania
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Son of a Beach » Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:26 pm

t_backoff wrote:
Son of a Beach wrote:But to be a little more serious... You are correct. I'm not happy with a board that has released very nearly zero new features since about 2008 (when did phpBB 3.0 come out?).
I phpBB3 came out in 2007. However, I would like to point out that phpBB 3.0.6 (released November 2009) contained many new features. ;)
Yes, thanks for the reminder. But in reality, the number of significant user/admin oriented features is very small. Again 'significant' and 'very small' are subjective terms, so I expect people to disagree with me.

Oleg
Former Team Member
Posts: 1221
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:42 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Oleg » Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:22 am

Son of a Beach wrote: Yes, every different competing software has good reasons to be chosen.
If you agree with this you have now contradicted your initial statement that "The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge".
Son of a Beach wrote:
(By the way, "very nearly zero new features" is not an accurate statement.)
No joke. "very nearly" is clearly subjective, and therefore is not strictly accurate and neither is it innaccurate.
Way to make a content-free argument. While there is no prescribed percentage or other measure of how little something must differ to be "very nearly" to something else, there are generally acceptable ideas of what "very nearly" means, and it is not the same as "anything" as you seem to suggest.

With respect to 3.0.x in particular, captcha system added in 3.0.6 was somewhere between 3.0 and 3.1 in terms of scope level. This fact alone disproves your assertion. You may not have known this but ignorance does not make false statements true.
Son of a Beach wrote: However, as a subjective statement is intended, I do think that it accurately reflects the feelings of a large number of phpBB users.
You cannot possibly know the feelings of "a large number of phpbb users". Even the posts on this board are not necessarily representative of "a large number of phpbb users". As a matter of fact what "a large number of phpbb users" means has not yet been defined (including all 30 pages of the falling behind topic).

Separately from this, how someone feels about a feature is not a measure of scope or novelty of said feature.
Yes. See the original post in this topic. :-) To summarise (in case you missed it) I think phpBB is too phpBB-focussed at the expense of being user-focussed. It's not necessarily 'wrong' or 'bad', but it's not want I want and I suspect most users would prefer user-focus. I think that one example of being 100% user focussed could be what I proposed in the original post.
Thank you for your opinion. I personally found it rather amusing. For reasons that I already gave in this topic, it is unlikely phpbb will follow your suggestion.
Now you appear to be attacking me and my use of the English language rather than the actual topic. Very poor form. But in any case, the definition of 'quality' in my dictionary is: the degree of excellence of something.

So you've got your definition from Wikipedia, I've used the word as I always saw fit without looking it up, but now when I do look it up I find that my dictionary matches my use of the word. So what?

At least now we know what each other means. Thanks for the lesson.
Not quite. I used the term "quality" in http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopi ... #p13136728, attaching a certain meaning to it, that meaning being roughly equivalent to what wikipedia has for "software quality" as I linked earlier.

Subsequently in http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopi ... #p13137608 you decided to redefine quality to mean something else. This redefinition muddies the discussion at best and at worst makes it seem that you are trying to alter the essence of my statement. There are plenty of ways for you to convey your opinions without resorting to such tactics.
Participate in phpBB development: Get involved | Issue tracker | Report a bug | Development board | [url=irc://chat.freenode.net/phpbb-dev]Development IRC chat[/url]
My stuff: mindlinkgame.com

User avatar
DionDesigns
Registered User
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:22 pm
Location: Uncertain due to momentum.
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by DionDesigns » Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:04 am

CaNNon_ wrote:
/a3 wrote:
DionDesigns wrote:It can't be because they have listened to a few people with tinfoil-hat tendencies who are scared to look at an unfamiliar site if it contains javascript.....or can it?
Security is not the only reason for disabling JavaScript. You will find that I'm also an accessibility advocate.

I don't believe I ever said I would oppose addition of JavaScript by the way. In fact, I'm all for it. On the condition, of course, that an appropriate fallback is provided.
Exactly a3 it's all about allowing the user choices, no question the use of scripts are good. Just because we have a site on the web doesn't mean everyone will just trust us.
I'll answer both at once to save bandwidth.

I completely agree that security is not the only reason that one might disable javascript. If one has an older system and encounters a jQuery-overboard site like I described above, the pages will be sluggish at best. The same is true with certain features in CSS3 and HTML5 (gradients/transitions and canvas). But that's an issue with poor programming, something I have never encountered (yet) with phpBB. So...a non-issue.

Offering users a choice is always a good thing, BUT...as with my jQuery example, one can go overboard. And in this case, it's gone WAY overboard. This topic, and several similar topics, were started by people who have become frustrated with what they perceive as a lack of features being added to phpBB3. Many have listed the features they find in MyBB/SMF/etc that they want in phpBB3. Funny thing...it seems that the majority require javascript. Why is that?

I'm going to raise a point here that probably deserves its own topic. Along with the (IMO) anti-JS vibe that permeates this site, I think part of the problem is the rigidness in the setup of MODs/Styles. Javascript enhancements don't really fit in either category because they can exist in both realms. Is it possible that third-party JS development has been stunted, and as a result, the features people are requesting are simply not available in the databases here?

Having said this, I have personally been grateful for the lack of JS enhancements. It's been a steady source of income for me for many years! But for other personal reasons, I'd now like to see more third-party "out of the box" enhancements and help with their development...and that is why I rejoined this board|forum (take your choice of term ;) ) after a 4-year hiatus.
Last edited by DionDesigns on Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Son of a Beach
Registered User
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:36 am
Location: Tasmania
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Son of a Beach » Thu Apr 19, 2012 3:01 am

Oleg wrote:
Son of a Beach wrote: Yes, every different competing software has good reasons to be chosen.
If you agree with this you have now contradicted your initial statement that "The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge".
That's a very odd conclusion. I never said that phpBB was useless or suited nobody. It is my belief that it could BETTER suit its users by pursuing a different course to what it is doing now. I never claimed that phpBB didn't have a feature set that didn't ideally suit at least some people.
Son of a Beach wrote:
(By the way, "very nearly zero new features" is not an accurate statement.)
No joke. "very nearly" is clearly subjective, and therefore is not strictly accurate and neither is it innaccurate.
Way to make a content-free argument. While there is no prescribed percentage or other measure of how little something must differ to be "very nearly" to something else, there are generally acceptable ideas of what "very nearly" means, and it is not the same as "anything" as you seem to suggest.
One good content free argument deserves another, eh? Seems like we're both playing that game, so I apologise for having responded in kind to your lack of content in some statements earlier.
With respect to 3.0.x in particular, captcha system added in 3.0.6 was somewhere between 3.0 and 3.1 in terms of scope level. This fact alone disproves your assertion. You may not have known this but ignorance does not make false statements true.
Captcha and quick reply were the main two features. There's very little of substance there apart from those two. But thanks for the reminder. Again, it's all a matter of opinion, and I know you'll disagree with my subjective opinion, but again, that doesn't make my opinion wrong.
Son of a Beach wrote: However, as a subjective statement is intended, I do think that it accurately reflects the feelings of a large number of phpBB users.
You cannot possibly know the feelings of "a large number of phpbb users". Even the posts on this board are not necessarily representative of "a large number of phpbb users". As a matter of fact what "a large number of phpbb users" means has not yet been defined (including all 30 pages of the falling behind topic).

Separately from this, how someone feels about a feature is not a measure of scope or novelty of said feature.
Shucks, you sure got me there. I don't know. Bummer. I guess that maybe I just guessed.
Yes. See the original post in this topic. :-) To summarise (in case you missed it) I think phpBB is too phpBB-focussed at the expense of being user-focussed. It's not necessarily 'wrong' or 'bad', but it's not want I want and I suspect most users would prefer user-focus. I think that one example of being 100% user focussed could be what I proposed in the original post.
Thank you for your opinion. I personally found it rather amusing. For reasons that I already gave in this topic, it is unlikely phpbb will follow your suggestion.
Doh! And I was so sure they all would. Oh, hang on. I think I already said in the original post (or soon after?) that I didn't expect that to happen. So no surprise there.
Now you appear to be attacking me and my use of the English language rather than the actual topic. Very poor form. But in any case, the definition of 'quality' in my dictionary is: the degree of excellence of something.

So you've got your definition from Wikipedia, I've used the word as I always saw fit without looking it up, but now when I do look it up I find that my dictionary matches my use of the word. So what?

At least now we know what each other means. Thanks for the lesson.
Not quite. I used the term "quality" in http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopi ... #p13136728, attaching a certain meaning to it, that meaning being roughly equivalent to what wikipedia has for "software quality" as I linked earlier.

Subsequently in http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopi ... #p13137608 you decided to redefine quality to mean something else. This redefinition muddies the discussion at best and at worst makes it seem that you are trying to alter the essence of my statement. There are plenty of ways for you to convey your opinions without resorting to such tactics.
Well I'm very sorry if my argument was so unclear to you. I thought I'd made it pretty darn clear what I was arguing. (Hint: the definition of quality was not it.).

In any case, I think that there is nothing in this entire post or your last post that is actually on topic, so I'll leave it there as there is no point continuing this side track discussion. We are just going to continue to irritate each other and I don't see anything that can be gained from that.

Oleg
Former Team Member
Posts: 1221
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:42 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Oleg » Thu Apr 19, 2012 6:54 am

DionDesigns wrote: Along with the (IMO) anti-JS vibe that permeates this site
There isn't one. There is a requirement that any JS done satisfies our quality requirements, which means graceful degradation and it has to work correctly (yes, there is a reason I'm mentioning this). Taken together it means that an acceptable js implementation takes a substantial amount of time.

3.1 already has some js and it will have working js once bugs in said js are fixed. You can help with that effort if you'd like.

We are also working on making js easier to write for extension authors.
Participate in phpBB development: Get involved | Issue tracker | Report a bug | Development board | [url=irc://chat.freenode.net/phpbb-dev]Development IRC chat[/url]
My stuff: mindlinkgame.com

User avatar
DionDesigns
Registered User
Posts: 515
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:22 pm
Location: Uncertain due to momentum.
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by DionDesigns » Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:22 am

Oleg wrote:
DionDesigns wrote: Along with the (IMO) anti-JS vibe that permeates this site
There isn't one.
Since this is a multi-national site, I probably shouldn't have used an acronym. IMO = In My Opinion. In my opinion, there is an anti-JS vibe that permeates this site. It was enough to drive me away four years ago. Things seem to have changed for the better, but it still feels like overall, javascript is considered unimportant and/or a necessary evil.
Oleg wrote:There is a requirement that any JS done satisfies our quality requirements, which means graceful degradation and it has to work correctly (yes, there is a reason I'm mentioning this). Taken together it means that an acceptable js implementation takes a substantial amount of time.
You mean it satisfies your requirements. In the case of javascript, graceful degradation has nothing to do with quality. In fact, you have people here telling you every day that this is ANTI-quality because it is hindering the development of some really great features. It's your decision whether or not to listen to these people, and I'm sure you realize that your decision will have an impact on the future success of the phpBB product.

As a side-comment, I certainly hope you're treating CSS3 the same way you're treating javascript. Since they use the browser's javascript engine to execute, many CSS3 features have the same issues you're so concerned about with javascript. Actually it's worse, because users are turning off javascript by choice. With CSS3, those using IE7 and IE8 have no choice, and those using IE9 have limited choice.

As for the javascript in phpBB 3.1, I'll take a look at the scripts if you provide a link to them, and to where you would like me to post my comments.

CaNNon_
Registered User
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:07 am

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by CaNNon_ » Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:06 pm

Captcha and quick reply were the main two features. There's very little of substance there apart from those two. But thanks for the reminder. Again, it's all a matter of opinion, and I know you'll disagree with my subjective opinion, but again, that doesn't make my opinion wrong.
I think you need to allow a bit more credit On that Son of a Beach. The captcha is like mini plugin system all it's own. ;)

Oleg
Former Team Member
Posts: 1221
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:42 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: The Best Thing that phpBB Can Do: Merge

Post by Oleg » Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:23 pm

DionDesigns wrote: Things seem to have changed for the better, but it still feels like overall, javascript is considered unimportant and/or a necessary evil.
True, we value functionality above flashiness. For 3.1 the priority is a hook/extension system, not javascript bits. That said we will accept patches that meet our requirements.
DionDesigns wrote: You mean it satisfies your requirements. In the case of javascript, graceful degradation has nothing to do with quality.
You are correct, degradation is a functional requirement and correct operation is certainly a functional requirement as well. I should have said "satisfies our functional and quality requirements", with quality requirements being things like readability and maintainability and functional requirements being what I listed in my previous post.
DionDesigns wrote: In fact, you have people here telling you every day that this is ANTI-quality because it is hindering the development of some really great features.
I already explained that features and quality are not synonyms. Right now ajax merge broke functionality, therefore immediate result of it was the quality of the product went down.
DionDesigns wrote: It's your decision whether or not to listen to these people, and I'm sure you realize that your decision will have an impact on the future success of the phpBB product.
I personally try to take into account all posts I read.
DionDesigns wrote: As a side-comment, I certainly hope you're treating CSS3 the same way you're treating javascript. Since they use the browser's javascript engine to execute, many CSS3 features have the same issues you're so concerned about with javascript. Actually it's worse, because users are turning off javascript by choice. With CSS3, those using IE7 and IE8 have no choice, and those using IE9 have limited choice.
This is not my specialty therefore I can't say too much about it other than I'm not sure what issues you foresee exactly. Obviously we support some browsers and do not support other browsers.
DionDesigns wrote:As for the javascript in phpBB 3.1, I'll take a look at the scripts if you provide a link to them, and to where you would like me to post my comments.
You can find the bug list here: http://area51.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic ... 8&start=80 and you can reply in that topic with your comments.
Participate in phpBB development: Get involved | Issue tracker | Report a bug | Development board | [url=irc://chat.freenode.net/phpbb-dev]Development IRC chat[/url]
My stuff: mindlinkgame.com

Post Reply

Return to “phpBB Discussion”