</Solidjeuh> wrote: ↑Sat Jul 20, 2019 6:26 pm
Well, personally I see no problem with editing files or using extensions to add/changes files/codes. That's the only way to learn. Been using phpBB since 3.0.7, and learned a lot in all those years ( css, html, little PHP ... ). But yes, changing things via ACP is good for "newbies"...
Well of course, and I'll never use the feature we're talking about, either. Yet still feel that it's a missing useful "core" functionality.
Any site operator who is already customizing the site's style for numerous other reasons besides "logo" won't ever need this feature. But people don't select and use phpBB because "I want to learn more about CSS, HTML, PHP, and templating frameworks." If they do want to do those things, that's great, but it's in addition to the original reason they're setting up the site.
What we can "assume" about someone installing phpBB is they want to host discussions.
Similar to how they didn't install Windows or Linux because they wanted to learn more about how to recover from file system failures, or how to deal with device drivers. They wanted to create documents and play games. They might get forced into the technical aspects one day, and its interesting information to learn. But it's not the point, nor necessarily what they wanted to choose to spend their time doing.
Well, I take that back on "I'll never use it." When helping someone else put a logo on their site, instead of manually creating a "stub style" with just the logo replacement so that future proSilver updates don't overwrite the changes, I would use (or just tell them to use) this new feature to specify their image instead. So I must be a "newbie".
Tastenplayer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 20, 2019 6:15 pm
...it really does bring something?
Yes, because of all the styles that
aren't that way.
No one is saying that any particular third-party style "must" use the specified logo image. Nor are we saying "stop creating styles which use background image banners which cannot be easily substituted", since that's one of many directions in which creativity runs.
But the reality could become that whether a particular third-party style
will use the ACP-configured logo image -- to at least incorporate it somehow, perhaps "in addition to" as opposed to "instead of" other images -- may become a feature users look for when choosing a style, based on how much effort the user wants to go through in customizing the style they choose. And yes, how well or how poorly the style deals with the image in cases of responsiveness is up to the style.
It's not "different" than what's already happening right now, today, when in absence of other built-in functionality, people start with "go out and replace site_logo.png in proSilver with something else." The results vary. They may or may not be happy. But many of them will be. But then next phpBB update, their image is gone again.
The idea is really just saying that an ACP option for "an image which represents my site" would make specifying this "one additional element of identity" easy, just like the site name and site description that ACP already lets them configure.
Having this option at least creates
the potential for "yeah, it really was just that easy", even if we stipulate it won't end up being applicable to 100% of use cases. We have all sorts of options that won't work for or aren't appropriate for all cases. But they exist for the cases where they do work, and will provide useful behavior.
Logo, background, forabg, colors etc... should all be manageable via ACP
(You thought saving was enough)
All my styles are updated to 3.3.2
