Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Arantor
5956
Features / Re: Birthday, calendar, plugin, core [VOTE NOW!]
« on October 11th, 2011, 12:25 PM »
Quote
I voted to keep birthdays core because I like the birthday message being sent - just in case it was voted to be removed totally. It can be a plugin as far as I am concerned. Talk about a u-turn
Nope, it was never going to be totally removed and never to be seen again. In fact, there's a problem before you start: birthday emails are sent independently of whether the calendar is enabled. Talk about logic disjoint.
Quote
IIRC there was talk of having birth date as part of the sign-up compulsory fields, dont quite know where that one ended up.
Birth date needs to remain in the core, oddly enough, because it's used for things like COPPA verification.
5957
Features / Re: Birthday, calendar, plugin, core [VOTE NOW!]
« on October 11th, 2011, 12:08 PM »
It's organisational. Having it makes it easier to organise, it doesn't directly facilitate sharing content in and of itself.

It won't be disappearing - just it won't in the very core of the software.


Question, to those who think things should remain core: why? I can give you quite a few reasons why things should be removed from the core and turned into officially support plugins. I can't find the same enthusiasm for keeping them core, especially as the odds are they will be just supported, as opposed to extended and improved.
5958
The Pub / Re: Spell checker
« on October 11th, 2011, 11:45 AM »
Quote
Now vBulletin does not have it and when I converted from SMF to it this was the single most complaint from my members
Yes, but do they actually *use* it?

Hands up who remembers Sony's infamous removal of OtherOS from PS3? There was a fairly huge outcry - even though 95%+ of users who complained don't use it.

That's something that I've been aware of for a while but never fully understood the dynamics of: people get very upset when you remove a choice from them, even if it's a choice they would probably never actually take. The mere fact of taking away that choice riles them up.
5959
Features / Re: New revs
« on October 11th, 2011, 11:20 AM »
Revision: 1093
Author: arantor
Date: 10:18:57, 11 October 2011
Message:
! Clean up of the internal plugin manager code. No need to tell it to iterate every child and test the element name, we can do that with the foreach and have it filter for us automatically. (ManagePlugins.php)

! Remove the need for Class-Package in the language pack getter. One step closer to purging the xmlArray class! (ManageServer.php)
----
Modified : /trunk/Sources/ManagePlugins.php
Modified : /trunk/Sources/ManageServer.php


(The point of getting rid of the xmlArray class (Class-Package) is that it's 17KB of XML handling that we don't need when SimpleXML will do the job just as well, if not faster. The only uses left now for xmlArray are in the old package manager, which I'm working on phasing out.)
5960
Development blog / Re: Plugging in the Plugin Manager
« on October 11th, 2011, 10:34 AM »
Author is doable; the author is available from the list of plugins, but plugin type... there's nothing in a plugin to indicate what type of plugin it is, and from experience I don't really want it to be. It's why, for example, sm.org's mod site has a lot of "New Features" and "Feature Enhancements" that aren't really either.

The only way around that would be to define the classifications up front and make them fixed (and don't provide a generic one) but that causes people to limit themselves, I find.
5961
Features / Re: New revs
« on October 11th, 2011, 10:14 AM »
Revision: 1092
Author: arantor
Date: 09:13:48, 11 October 2011
Message:
! Plugin manager should now sort case-insensitively. It's still going to be off if there are mixed languages present, but there's no good way around that. (ManagePlugins.php)

! Provide filtering capability in the plugin manager, filtering by all/enabled/disabled/can't-be-enabled (aka incompatible) (ManagePlugins.php, ManagePlugins.template.php, ManagePlugins language file)
----
Modified : /trunk/Sources/ManagePlugins.php
Modified : /trunk/Themes/default/ManagePlugins.template.php
Modified : /trunk/Themes/default/languages/ManagePlugins.english.php
5962
Development blog / Re: Plugging in the Plugin Manager
« on October 11th, 2011, 10:10 AM »
Ask and ye shall receive.
5963
Features / Re: Birthday, calendar, plugin, core [VOTE NOW!]
« on October 11th, 2011, 09:58 AM »
Quote
Btw I'm not a calendar user myself. I could care less about it. But I think it has potential for being useful like having a link in all dates that would point to that days posts.
That can be part of the calendar plugin.
Quote
I'm just saying I thought more people liked the calendar.
I don't think people *dislike* it per se. I think partly the problem is some people use the calendar solely for birthdays (which to me seems odd because birthdays are a social feature, while a calendar is more organisational) and others use the calendar as a calendar, but find it a bit limited.

I think if it were more functional, it would be more likely to be used. At the same time I can see that it's not exactly something that's needed that heavily.
5964
Features / Re: Birthday, calendar, plugin, core [VOTE NOW!]
« on October 11th, 2011, 09:48 AM »
Sure they are, which is why they're part of the calendar, no?
5965
Development blog / Re: Plugging in the Plugin Manager
« on October 11th, 2011, 09:20 AM »
OK, so as per my screenshot, there's 5 plugins in there, and they're in (basically) alphabetic order.

I wonder if it might not be useful to provide some kind of filtering, so you can see plugins that are enabled, that are disabled, and those that are not able to be enabled?
5966
Features / Re: Birthday, calendar, plugin, core [VOTE NOW!]
« on October 11th, 2011, 09:16 AM »
OK, let me put down how I see it. It might make a difference, it might not.[1]

Whether we like it or not, Wedge isn't a forum. It's a framework first and foremost, that just happens to be tuned to running a forum. User authentication, the template system, plugin system, these are all symptoms of a framework. As are a good deal of the components actually in Wedge.

Now, from my perspective, if it is the case that we have this setup, then to me the core framework should be best optimised for the one thing that is common to all forums (and varies between important and unimportant for non-forum uses): making the process of being able to share content and discussion easier.

Having AeMe in the core does this, IMO, both the auto embed and gallery parts (assuming using them for attachments), but the calendar and birthdays facilities do not inherently make it easier to share content and discussion.

To me, they're facilitators for social engagement, not content and discussion, so while they are important for some forums, for others they're absolutely unimportant.

Now, you could argue that other things we're doing fall into the same category, in particular the ability to like content, but that to me sits on the border between being content encouraging and social participation. It allows people to indicate they like some content, encourages more of it as a consequence and it allows people to feel they have an outlet for expressing an opinion without necessarily having to post - on those grounds I'd be inclined to make it core rather than through a plugin.


The bottom line is that this is a complex road we travel, we're not going to be able to please everyone all of the time, but I suspect the facility of having things as plugins that can co-exist nicely will really help matters.
 1. I'm not trying to change your mind, am I? :lol: Seriously, though, I do want to get across how I see it, to explain why I'm even suggesting/asking.
5967
The Pub / Re: Spell checker
« on October 11th, 2011, 08:50 AM »
Quote
I've been impartial about this because I use the spellchecker via my browser
That isn't really impartial; it's the main reason to cast out the spell-check function...
5968
Features / Re: Template skeleton!
« on October 11th, 2011, 01:28 AM »
Question: what happens to the size of the file before and after with gzip?

I remember someone doing a test to shorten $scripturl to just 'index.php' instead of prepending it with $boardurl, and finding the gzipped difference was only 200 bytes. I wonder if something similar would be the case here.

I also wonder whether it wouldn't be worthwhile stripping \s{2,} from the buffer while we're at it (since bbcode/posted code is not subject to that limitation, as it's injected with nbsp entities during preparse)
5969
The Pub / Re: Spell checker
« on October 11th, 2011, 01:18 AM »
Quote
Hey, I knew about these too :P
I stand corrected, then! :) But what I was getting at is that it's a very exclusive club. And the more time that goes on the more exclusive that's going to be, especially for a feature that really doesn't work all that well, and is being outclassed on the browser end (except by IE users who I think are still left without a spellchecker)
5970
Features / Re: Template skeleton!
« on October 11th, 2011, 01:16 AM »
Quote
Does anyone know of a PHP script that can compress JavaScript on the fly VERY quickly? And I mean, VERY?
I don't mind if it isn't optimized for size... I need something that optimizes for speed!
I don't think there is one. Packing JS is not normally a JIT type process, it's done in batch and pushed out once done. Even the likes of JSMin and Packer are not designed for JIT and not really in the manner in which Wedge uses them (which is about the closest to JIT I think you're going to get)