phpBB.com

stevemaury wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:55 pm

The database keeps track of who is subscribed to what forum. An SQL query could produce a list, but you'd have to run it often as subscribers changed.
>

Hi Steve,

Thanks for seeing through my misleading terminology (on 'groups' and 'membership') to provide the above pertinent workaround!

What I'd like is a seamless extension that runs such SQL queries behind-the-scenes when the corresponding link is clicked. Such forum-membership features could eventually be integrated into the core functionality of a subsequent phpBB version, maybe by implementing actual groups.

BTW your signature recommends BlueHost, which happens to be hosting my svĀbhinava (website and associated) bulletin board since Dec. 04. My website had been on GoDaddy for 20 years, but Plex had no specific support for phpBB (actually the range of software offerings has dwindled over the recent years..). When I decided to implement phpBB and integrate it more tightly with our collaborative website, I followed the recommendation on your site and switched to BlueHost, which is indeed much cheaper and throws in https:// for free. I'm glad to have done so!

I also notice that you offer paid services which, at the moment, I need more for my website than for its phpBB section. Yesterday at noon (Chicago time), I ran a global search and replace on my local drive (within Expression Web) to replace Windows character encoding with charset=utf-8 (after the migration many legacy pages were not displaying special characters with diacritic marks properly). I then FTP'd all changed files (which included much more than those where the replacements were made...), amounting to over 7000. Since then, the website is showing directory listings instead of displaying the html (.php) pages as expected. My .htacess within public_html on the shared server is correctly configured.

BlueHost tech support says they can help only with their 'native' apps (e.g., WordPress) and not with custom code. And I am at a loss to figure out which other configuration-related files may have been overwritten (under public_html). But I suppose this would be easy for someone like you:

https://www.svabhinava.org/

I've been maintaining our international collaborative publishing site as a labor of love for the last 20 years without paid subscriptions or donations. Instead, I often translate, edit, reformat, etc. the writings of others for free. But I'd be happy pay a reasonable fee out of my own pocket.

Regards,

Sunthar

PS. Yes, I should have PM'd the 2nd part of my post. But I thought it might provide better background for my technical issues with phpBB...

svAbhinava wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:26 pm

...
Such forum-membership features could eventually be integrated into the core functionality of a subsequent phpBB version, maybe by implementing actual groups.

I'm willing to bet that this idea will get very little support.
The existing permission system already caters for most scenarios using a very logical system.
What you are proposing actually undermines the whole system because your group per forum system implies that there would be a group for each forum. You may think that this is the natural way but just wait until you get to 50 forums with different permissions (based on user-characteristics).

Experiment with phpBB for a couple of days, get the hang of the permission system (use the permissions mask to see how the total permissions set is reached). Read the documentation and learn to work with a personal webserver on your PC so that you can experiment and test before going online.

P_I wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:12 pm

svAbhinava wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 23, 2020 12:39 am

>
The previous Yahoo! Group showed all the subscribers, when they joined, username, etc., in a single listing with a total. Where can I find similar functionality within the ACP, i.e., to list members specific to a subforum (that corresponds to the old Yahoo! Group)? This will help me better focus my energies, e.g., which subforums to prioritize for posting, which to grow, etc., to name but a couple of reasons.

Just thinking out loud on what you are trying to do. I understand the Yahoo! Groups shutdown and that you are trying to consolidate several groups.

However given how phpBB works, I'm not sure I understand why you expecting members to 'belong' to a subforum? Or subscribe to specific subforum(s)? Won't members be free to view and read any of the subforums that you are offering?

The phpBB community is a good example, I visit often enough that I only use the one of the Quick links, typically search.php?search_id=unreadposts as my main navigation method. [My] second choice is often search.php?search_id=active_topics.

I generally don't rely on the phpBB functionality to subscribe (or bookmark) topics and/or forums. That's generally how I navigate ALL boards (communities) where I'm a member and where the board is using phpBB.

If you want to see which forums are generating traffic and posts, the index.php page shows the number of topics and posts in each subforum.

Apologies if I've derailed the discussion or totally missed the point of what you are trying to accomplish.

For from "derailing the discussion" you've actually clobbered the nail on my head, making me suddenly realize, during a long walk yesterday, that I had been too fixated on the 'forum' construct inherited from Yahoo! Groups. Actually, phpBB is offering more than I asked for by allowing proactive visitors (including guests, by default) to view everything without being 'subscribed' to any forums at all. Prioritizing should be based on activity.

I've added a new Getting Started - Quick Links guideline, modeled on your above behavior, to our 'Rules' before mention of subscribing to forums and topics for more passive registered users, who might still need to be reminded.

https://www.svabhinava.org/forum/app.php/rules

My core fallacy was to assume that those not 'subscribed' to a forum were not interested in it, when they might actually be the most interested...

Thanks indeed for thinking aloud!

Sunthar

david63 wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:46 pm

svAbhinava wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:22 pm

wouldn't it greatly enhance functionality if phpBB were to indeed maintain actual groups based on forum ID

That again would not be too difficult to make into an extension but the main problem with it would be from a maintenance point of view if, say, you had 100 or more fora.

The 13 forums on my phpBB board are already a challenge to nurture (fortunately, my Yahoo! archives from the past 20 years are enough to seed them with substantive prior threads on diverse topics). I doubt they'd go up to even 20, even if start to host additional forums for collaborators.

However, as my most recent reply shows, the practical need for such functionality is already moot.

Thanks,

Sunthar

warmweer wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 8:01 pm

svAbhinava wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:26 pm

...
Such forum-membership features could eventually be integrated into the core functionality of a subsequent phpBB version, maybe by implementing actual groups.

I'm willing to bet that this idea will get very little support.
The existing permission system already caters for most scenarios using a very logical system.
What you are proposing actually undermines the whole system because your group per forum system implies that there would be a group for each forum. You may think that this is the natural way but just wait until you get to 50 forums with different permissions (based on user-characteristics).

As may have been suspected from my last couple of responses on this topic, I agree with you by now. Whereas I won't be dealing with more than 15 relatively scholarly, low-traffic discussion groups (which are already personally taxing...), phpBB has been conceived from the ground up to handle many more high-volume forums. And, more important as you say, is that would undermine its underlying architecture.

warmweer wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 05, 2021 8:01 pm

Experiment with phpBB for a couple of days, get the hang of the permission system (use the permissions mask to see how the total permissions set is reached). Read the documentation and learn to work with a personal webserver on your PC so that you can experiment and test before going online.

I'm still having problems understanding permissions. I created a hidden forum visible and accessible only to my widely dispersed family, by putting them all in an exclusive group and granting it the required permissions. Three of them were granted "group leader" status, eventually to accord them privileges such as adding new members, moderating, etc. Last night I discovered that this family group could view and access the forum, except for these three leaders, who do not belong to any other group. I had to (re-) accord each of them the same permissions individually to do so. Reviewing the permission masks, as you've instructed, left me clueless. Why have these leaders not inherited the permissions of their group?

Thanks, also for the advice regarding setting up a local test server that I've already begun reading up on. Our site was down because .htacces on the server with its PHP (7.2) handlers had been inadvertently overwritten. Can't risk such things happening again!

Regards,

Sunthar

Based on your original request you may be interested in this - viewtopic.php?f=456&t=2580136

Check the setting Exempt group leaders from group permissions in Manage groups.

Also read this - phpBB3 Permissions

stevemaury wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:13 pm

Check the setting Exempt group leaders from group permissions in Manage groups.

Also read this - phpBB3 Permissions

Thank, Steve.

I recall (and verified) now that group leaders had been exempted thinking that they would thereby still inherit the privileges (access to the Family Forum) but NOT the many restrictions. I now realize that such 'exemption' works both ways.

So, if I now no longer exempt them from the group permissions, they'd still have to be individually granted the many more privileges which the rest of their group doesn't have? The instructions say to avoid granting user-based permissions, and I'd be violating them either way. Is there no way of treating the leaders as a subgroup that can be granted such privileges?

Sunthar

david63 wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:10 pm

Based on your original request you may be interested in this - viewtopic.php?f=456&t=2580136

I've already installed and verified that your forumsubs extension works. By clicking the new button at the bottom of each forum, I can see all its subscribed members in alphabetical order. This listing would be even more useful, if it could also display the total number of subscribers. As my primary forum has over 800 members, I have to scroll down without a sense of how many they are.

Choosing the new Subscriptions item in the user profile, the panel shows all the forum categories that can be expanded / collapsed to show / hide their respective subforums. However, the primary forum, which has no parent (and is its own category), does not show at the top.

Thanks for taking my request to heart, David! It could have saved much time while setting up our forums. Even with that behind us, your extension remains useful, for many users (despite their scholarly credentials) are overwhelmed by the wealth of options and choices of phpBB.

Regards,

Sunthar

PS. I'll copy this post over to your extensions topic and pursue further exchanges there.

svAbhinava wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:36 pm

stevemaury wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:13 pm

Check the setting Exempt group leaders from group permissions in Manage groups.

Also read this - phpBB3 Permissions

Thank, Steve.

I recall (and verified) now that group leaders had been exempted thinking that they would thereby still inherit the privileges (access to the Family Forum) but NOT the many restrictions. I now realize that such 'exemption' works both ways.

So, if I now no longer exempt them from the group permissions, they'd still have to be individually granted the many more privileges which the rest of their group doesn't have? The instructions say to avoid granting user-based permissions, and I'd be violating them either way. Is there no way of treating the leaders as a subgroup that can be granted such privileges?

Sunthar

No. Permissions are additive. Uncheck the "Exempt" box. Done. They continue to have all other permissions they had before.