Approving New Post issue after Update 3.3.13

[Gumboots]

This is a situation that would be ideal for a quick bug fix patch that does not touch anything else. Call it "Bertie fixes f***up".

[invenio]

This is a situation that would be ideal for a quick bug fix patch that does not touch anything else. Call it "Bertie fixes f***up".

I agree.

Can the developers perhaps comment on why "mini-patches" like this are not officially released? This would be a single file replace so it would be better for a "just replace this one file" vs the standard full update process. Unless a bulletin board admin came directly here and found this specific thread, and followed it to the end, there would be no way of them knowing of this issue.

Why not just make a announcement post on the homepage of phpBB.com with instructions of just download and replace this one file and provide a download link? Perhaps there is a good reason behind this that I am not aware of but why keep a bug in place (especially in the official full download package) when a quick patch is so easily done? v3.3.14 is probably months away. Just release it as v3.3.13.1. IMHO.

[danieltj]

I understand the frustration but the team needs to follow a process to ensure problems don’t crop up and ultimately bugs like this do happen in software development. You’re free to update your board with the fix I posted now if you want. If not, I’m sure the development team will look at fixing this as soon as they can.

[Gumboots]

I know sh*t happens. Been there myself, more than once. I'm not expecting the team to be infallible, and I realise that they largely have to depend on who can and will do beta/RC testing for them.

My point was that rather than bundling this into another full release, which will attempt to deal with umpteen other things (because you won't be able to resist) and that will inevitably complicate matters, and may inadvertently lead to another regression, situations like this are ideal for a bug fix patch that quickly, easily and effectively deals with one specific issue.

IOW, I'm not knocking the team. I suggesting a way that could save them (and users) more grief.

[ssl]

Work fine Daniel, thanks

[invenio]

I understand the frustration but the team needs to follow a process to ensure problems don’t crop up and ultimately bugs like this do happen in software development. You’re free to update your board with the fix I posted now if you want. If not, I’m sure the development team will look at fixing this as soon as they can.

No frustration or criticism. The phpBB team is amazing, has a great support staff (as clearly shown here), and I find it amazing that such high quality software is available for free. So this is not a complaint.

My comment was really just a question of why phpBB doesn't do official targeted minor patches? Small bugs like this will crop up from time to time. That is expected. I was just trying to get a better understanding of why larger updates (which are obviously going to take much more time) are the preferred method of fixing isolated bugs vs a small single patch file.

[mrix2000]

I can confirm the edit works fine

[danieltj]

I understand the frustration but the team needs to follow a process to ensure problems don’t crop up and ultimately bugs like this do happen in software development. You’re free to update your board with the fix I posted now if you want. If not, I’m sure the development team will look at fixing this as soon as they can.

No frustration or criticism. The phpBB team is amazing, has a great support staff (as clearly shown here), and I find it amazing that such high quality software is available for free. So this is not a complaint.

My comment was really just a question of why phpBB doesn't do official targeted minor patches? Small bugs like this will crop up from time to time. That is expected. I was just trying to get a better understanding of why larger updates (which are obviously going to take much more time) are the preferred method of fixing isolated bugs vs a small single patch file.

I don't really understand the concept of 'minor patches' because the fix will need to be included in a new version of the software for when people download it for a new install. Do you mean why does the team not update the 3.3.13 package to include the fix rather than releasing a new version?

A new version needs to be released so that people are aware within the ACP that a new update is available for them. There will be lots of people not aware that this bug exists. I didn't know about it until I saw this topic and then I had to investigate to figure out what the issue was, and then after that try and figure out a fix.

I appreciate that the fix is very small and so it should in theory be a quick job to release an update but unfortunately (well, fortunately really), the team follows a strict release policy to ensure that everything is done correctly and that a new version is properly ready for the public to use. It's just one of those things really, it can't be helped and I understand you're not criticising the team. It's just the nature of software development.

[ssl]

I don't really understand the concept of 'minor patches'

These could be fixes released after a new version like those released by Apple for iPhones and Macs. Everyone is free to install them or not.
But here we owed the initial subject.

[Lady_G]

I appreciate that the fix is very small and so it should in theory be a quick job to release an update but unfortunately (well, fortunately really), the team follows a strict release policy to ensure that everything is done correctly and that a new version is properly ready for the public to use. It's just one of those things really, it can't be helped and I understand you're not criticising the team. It's just the nature of software development.

I agree with this approach.

Based on the nature of the change, I have implemented the patch in my test environment and confirm the fix. It will be incorporated when I update my production server.

As stated earlier, only the "Delete" selection is available in the drop-down menu. Is this intentional for the prosilver style?

[thecoalman]

My comment was really just a question of why phpBB doesn't do official targeted minor patches?

This has happened 3 times in the past but they weren't minor. Either security issue or a major bug.