Seriously?Callum95 wrote:Features = bloat. Why on earth would you need to include a blog in the core of a forum software?!
One thing, although there is a hooks system in phpBB olympus, its not a very good hooks system granted but there is a hooks system. And this sort of this is possible. I have a fully functional blog MOD (In development) which has 1 edit to overall_header.html (less than a lot of small MODs) for the link to the blog. Quite often, because the current hooks sytem isn't as powerful as maybe it should/could be, it is very very rarely used (only seen this in a few modifications), even when it can be. But still, 3.1 should streamline the hooks system and result in widespread adoption.Ger wrote:Ad 1: I too think that phpBB misses some features. However, when 3.1 is done, there's a very nice hook system available. When this is the case, phpBB becomes even more flexible than it is today, while the core remains lightweight. From that point on, blogs, chats, galleries, calandars, social media stuff an all that other kind of add-ons can be really that: an add-on. Download it from the customisation database, upload it to your site and run the installer. Many people say phpBB is "bad" because it requires MODS instead of plugins, referring to Wordpress and such which is much simpler. But when 3.1 is here, how much does phpBB differ from Wordpress in that department?
Git CLI is linux and windows. mysysgit includes a GUI and a CLI version. http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/Ger wrote:Ad 2: Contributing is quite difficult indeed. I'm quite experienced with both phpBB as PHP and SQL. Therefore I have a good understanding of the code and know how certain changed should be made. And even now and then I have some spare time that I could spend on contributing to phpBB.
However, contributing is quite a challenge. First, there is the RFC forum. There are a few dozens of open RFC's to pick from. Second, there's the tracker, where several hundreds of open tickets. Wow, where did those come from? There aren't that many RFC's. Sure, there are links here and there, but not all tickets have a RFC linked and vice versa.
Also, there's usually a discussion in both the 3.x discussion forum, the RFC topic and the tracker ticket itself. Especially with the more thoroughly discussed RFC's it's quite some work just to understand what the eventual RFC is.
When I finally understand what's going on, ideally I could just download the latest development version, install it and make the required changes. Upload it again, summerize the changes made and be done with it. However, I'm forced to use GIT, something entirely new to learn. Pull request, push requests, all that kind of gibber-gabber I don't really understand. While basically I think GIT does just that: provide an interface to merge changes.
I've took the effort to look at working with Git on Windows, but it assumes you already have experience. The other provided option is using it command line, but that's only voor Linux Users as far as I know. Most people use Windows however.
Understanding GIT is therefore a major barrier the way it's now. Sure, it's said several times that devs will want to assist potential contributors through IRC, but then I have to also install and learn IRC, just to install and learn GIT, just to be able to contribute... That's quite some effort to be made.
Summing it up, I have 2 suggestions:
Thanks for reading.
- Assign someone who regularly summerizes all the discussions about an RFC in the TS of that RFC. That should at least contain the agreed change and the approach to be taken, including denied fixes if any (and why those are denied). That way, someone who wants to contribute can quickly assess the situation and decide wether or not he can and still wants contribute.
- Create a easy, step-by-step instructions for both Windows and Linux users how to install and use Git. Also provide a complete example involving both file and database changes. Don't hide it far far away in the Wiki, but link to it from the Get Involved page.
In addition, you might want to add the Get Involved page tot the development start page or at least the submenu of development.
They work with IRC and their both free. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean their not any good.Callum95 wrote:They're both horrible! And not IRC clients xDUnknown Bliss wrote:IRC client such as Trillian or Pidgin
That's the major case: in 3.0 hooks are rarely used because it already was more common to MOD than to hook. 3.1 however will probably be more hooked than modded from the release of the first RC. Using hooks should than be almost as easy as adding a plugin to Wordpress and such. No need to put everything in the core anymore. The way I see it, the development as a whole will than be much more open since MOD authors (or Hook authors) will effectively contribute almost as much as developers, at least for the experience of the end user (board admins).Unknown Bliss wrote:One thing, although there is a hooks system in phpBB olympus, its not a very good hooks system granted but there is a hooks system.
But still, 3.1 should streamline the hooks system and result in widespread adoption.
While I thank you for this info, the point I'm trying to make is that to make a contribution at all, it requires me to do much more than simply downloading - changing - repack - upload. While for smaller changes some summed up modifications may be accepted the way i did here, for more complex changes that just won't work. Not for me, but surely not for the dev who should implement it.Unknown Bliss wrote:Git CLI is linux and windows. mysysgit includes a GUI and a CLI version. http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/
If you are interested in learning git then here is a good guide but nothing beats being taught by a friend if you know anyone who can use git.
However you can just submit a .patch file or a diff or even just a list of changes in a ticket and a developer will review/commit it for you. Knowing git is helpful but it isn't required.
Probably, but the point I was making was this very likely situation:Unknown Bliss wrote:As to learning IRC, its easier than installing phpBB.
Well, the aim is for almost all hooks and file edits being very very rare (meaning MOD authors need to start submitting hook RFCs for their MODs if they intend to continue their MODs for 3.1).Ger wrote:Thank you for your input.That's the major case: in 3.0 hooks are rarely used because it already was more common to MOD than to hook. 3.1 however will probably be more hooked than modded from the release of the first RC. Using hooks should than be almost as easy as adding a plugin to Wordpress and such. No need to put everything in the core anymore. The way I see it, the development as a whole will than be much more open since MOD authors (or Hook authors) will effectively contribute almost as much as developers, at least for the experience of the end user (board admins).Unknown Bliss wrote:One thing, although there is a hooks system in phpBB olympus, its not a very good hooks system granted but there is a hooks system.
But still, 3.1 should streamline the hooks system and result in widespread adoption.
I'm sure some people wouldn't mind writing a wiki article (similar to whats being done here) as to how to use Git GUI and/or CLI from installation to a pull request being merged. I wouldn't mind doing this (except I've only ever used mysysgit but I've used mysysgit GUI and CLI/Bash) if people agree and I'll write it up today/tomorrow for posting on the wiki maybe this weekend. If you think it would help?Ger wrote:Don't get me wrong: I'm not against learning Git, but it would be very useful to read a step-by-step guide just how to use Git in phpBB. Take a wide-spread Git client, provide an install guide and an example how one should use it when contributing to phpBB. That basic guide simply isn't here right now.
When someone able to contribute knows these basics, he'll probably learn the rest quick enough while using it or otherwise he'll be able to use Google.
in your second paragraph you do what you are accusing people of in your first paragraph.BK67 wrote:I've noticed quite a few tit-for-tat knee-jerk responses from some who claim, in their replies, that, "Judging by the number of people who use phpBB..." is justification enough to base fact upon. In reality, this is not an adequate figure to base *anything* on, other than hypothetical opinion.
The fact is, a large number of users who download this software end up changing the core code in an effort to give them more features -- some features that exist elsewhere --snip......
Perhaps if you wanted to have a front page of your site generated using content from your board. You know like phpBB.com has right here? Albeit through some custom implementation I guess.Callum95 wrote:Features = bloat. Why on earth would you need to include a blog in the core of a forum software?!
Actually, he listed a detailed list of grievances here.Lumpy Burgertushie wrote:and, like others, you mention features that phpbb does not have that other bulletin boards do but you do not mention what those features might be.
Malphas wrote:There's also a tendency to get hung up on countering individual users' suggestions (e.g. stating why specific feature x shouldn't be included by default, or isn't important) rather than step back and look at the bigger picture of general dissatisfaction that's growing from the lack of progress in phpBB development.