Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
About SMF and this project
« on November 3rd, 2012, 01:26 AM »
I'm glad to see this project still going strong. The concept is very good because it seems to encapsulate both SMF's simplicity and speed from the core but now this project is taking advantage of the modern web - something SMF still hasn't surprisingly (to me) done yet. Obviously it's falling out of competition everyday the same bland features still stay in place... The move with providing jQuery support is a bit late in my opinion as I'm not sure what the real need for all that legacy code is still needed for. So, kudos - I believe this is going to be very successful and bring in some new users to what could have been SMF's userbase (if they did some things right).

As for SMF itself, I am still surprised to see some volatility between the team and some of the members here that has taken place especially within SMF. The politics have gone on too long and to me it's just childish now.

I also have my opinions on the SMF team, but nonetheless, you have my support, and I hope I can start making plugins when it's ready or contribute in any way possible to help push this forward.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #1, on November 3rd, 2012, 01:31 AM »
The biggest problem with SMF as it stands is that it had a 5 year development cycle, and other than a few modest features, it doesn't really know what to do with itself because it's put out the message "I'm a forum!" for so long that it doesn't appear to understand how to look any further.
Quote
As for SMF itself, I am still surprised to see some volatility between the team and some of the members here that has taken place especially within SMF. The politics have gone on too long and to me it's just childish now.
Now you know why I asked people to knock it on the head. That, and certain very angry words exchanged in the last few days about something entirely unrelated to Wedge where people don't appear to be able to distinguish between 'getting things as a reward for donation' and 'paying for a service' as being really two parts of the same thing.

Also, I find it hilarious that SMF is not even listed at forumcomplaints.com, though that really shows how little people care about SMF, I think.


Thank you for your enthusiasm :) The plugin system is not as 'flexible' as SMF's but we believe it is more supportable and maintainable going forward :)
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #2, on November 3rd, 2012, 02:18 AM »
Quote from Arantor on November 3rd, 2012, 01:31 AM
The biggest problem with SMF as it stands is that it had a 5 year development cycle, and other than a few modest features, it doesn't really know what to do with itself because it's put out the message "I'm a forum!" for so long that it doesn't appear to understand how to look any further.
Pretty much, yea.  If there is no appropriately scheduled development cycle, there is no way SMF can keep up with its competitors. The biggest problem I notice with people's opinions on SMF is that it is obviously too bland. Within those 5 years, something could have been done to help bring it further into what the web is now rather than what it was 5 years ago. I'm not totally sure if SMF was just designed to be very bland in itself, but to me, this concept won't last very long in a very dynamic and engaging web.
Quote from Arantor on November 3rd, 2012, 01:31 AM
Thank you for your enthusiasm :) The plugin system is not as 'flexible' as SMF's but we believe it is more supportable and maintainable going forward :)
I read around before making this topic, and I did see a topic mentioning Wedge's plugin system. In my opinion, the only reason it could never be as flexible as SMF's system (atleast right now) is obviously because SMF allows any code to be changed. As I see it, as long as there is a hook system that can allow a developer to access the most useful data or allow code to be ran in a useful context, there is no need to be able to just edit any piece of code. And not to mention the fact hooks are a lot cleaner in concept, Wedge shouldn't even need to worry if it's not flexible enough, cause if there are hooks in the right place it won't matter - developers will always have a place to inject code.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #3, on November 3rd, 2012, 02:31 AM »
Quote
The biggest problem I notice with people's opinions on SMF is that it is obviously too bland. Within those 5 years, something could have been done to help bring it further into what the web is now rather than what it was 5 years ago. I'm not totally sure if SMF was just designed to be very bland in itself, but to me, this concept won't last very long in a very dynamic and engaging web.
It's not as simple as that. In that 5 years, you had a complete turnover of developers, and for at least a year, activity was pretty much zero. But to not all of the web has to be dynamic and engaging - not every site has to be such.
Quote
In my opinion, the only reason it could never be as flexible as SMF's system (atleast right now) is obviously because SMF allows any code to be changed.
Yup, that's the practicality of it - if you're in the situation where you can change *any* code, it allows for complete flexibility, but you've seen all the problems attached to it. I'd rather have less functionality and far less support headaches.

I'm satisfied with the overall level of flexibility that can be achieved.

Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #4, on November 3rd, 2012, 02:51 AM »
Quote from Arantor on November 3rd, 2012, 02:31 AM
Quote
The biggest problem I notice with people's opinions on SMF is that it is obviously too bland. Within those 5 years, something could have been done to help bring it further into what the web is now rather than what it was 5 years ago. I'm not totally sure if SMF was just designed to be very bland in itself, but to me, this concept won't last very long in a very dynamic and engaging web.
It's not as simple as that. In that 5 years, you had a complete turnover of developers, and for at least a year, activity was pretty much zero. But to not all of the web has to be dynamic and engaging - not every site has to be such.
Right, it doesn't, but in my opinion SMF itself doesn't have much to say for itself in terms of being as engaging as it really could. I don't know if this is because of the actual mods available or maybe because the platform itself makes it too complicated. Maybe that'll change once jQuery gets settled in the core because it sucks having to deal with issues when it comes to loading jQuery when another mod has this dependency as well (this coming from someone who had people experience issues with my board reordering mod  and the jQuery statistics mod).

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #5, on November 3rd, 2012, 03:12 AM »
What does it lack about being engaging that, say, MyBB has?

Speaking as someone who was inside the system when the churn was really going on, I think the largest part of the problem isn't that the platform is too hard to get into - I managed to make dozens of mods (second only to Karl in terms of number) without any problems. The churn is the first problem - all the people who were around during 1.1 that got to know it have pretty much all gone in the delay of waiting for 2.0. The second problem is that the politics and BS that are still flying around has since driven away the people who do know the platform.

There is a group of hardcore SMF coders, who know the system inside and out, who've been using this code for years. I'm in that group, so is Nao, Feline, SlammedDime, plus the former developers. We've all lived and breathed it. But there is absolutely no-one left in any meaningful capacity now out of that group. Even the current developers - who to be fair to them are doing a great job of trying to get to know the thousands of lines of code - don't have that same depth of knowledge, so they're already stuck playing catch-up, while those of us who've been doing this stuff way too long have all been driven away by the penis waving.

The Forks board is probably the greatest example of that, at least as far as Wedge is concerned. There are still only two viable forks of SMF, all of the others long since abandoned. Yet because we are still using SMF 1.1.x's licence (for our protection, I might add), it's not merely forbidden to link to here, it's practically forbidden to even discuss it. (Even though they themselves went to great lengths to defend SMF 1.1.x's licence as 'open' without really being open, which is beyond hypocritical)

Basically, what it all amounts to is a serious case of 'Not Invented Here' syndrome, combined with not wanting anyone else to play in their sandbox. Add three parts hypocrisy, two parts idiocy and one part stick-up-the-ass.

Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #6, on November 3rd, 2012, 03:18 AM »
In regards to an overly complicated platform, my apologies because I'm thinking more of the front-end and utilizing things such as Javascript-powered effects which seem to be popular lately.

As for MyBB, I don't actually use it (only developed a simple plugin for it), but I'm thinking of software such as IPB or XenForo where there are things that just come to mind.

Kindred

  • Posts: 166
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #7, on November 4th, 2012, 03:55 PM »
well, IMO effects are overrated.
I actually tend to rate sites LESS for the more "effects" they have.
(I recently tried out a site and left, never to return, because of all the "bells and whistles" that the webmaster had installed.)

On the other hand, I agree with Arantor that the biggest problem that SMF has faced (and still faces) is churn of staff and the development time. Although 2.1 is in alpha as well. It includes many more hooks and much more JS crap if that's your cup-o-tea


As for discussion of wedge. :) Now that all the real ugliness is behind us, discussion/mention is fine.... within certain limits, of course, since it is (technically) a competing software. :)
The fact that wedge isn't allowed in the "forks" board is, of course, because the license (of the alpha, at least) is not inline with the rules of the board. (and no, that rule was not specifically targeted at Wedge - although we did realize it would affect discussion of wedge, primarily, at the time.) I will note that the inclusion of an area to discuss forks of a software on the main site is something that no other software has or allows, to the best of my knowledge. We just included certain rules to what we want to be shared on the SM site. :)


Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #8, on November 4th, 2012, 04:04 PM »
So no other forum software has a "forks board", maybe that's because none of the other forums have any forks of any substance.

Also, I don't care what you say, Wedge could move to an open source licence and it would still be treated as a rd headed step child by arrogant berks who have a stick up their arse. People like CoreISP, that is. You know as well as I do that there will never be harmony between the two projects.

Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #9, on November 4th, 2012, 05:04 PM »
Quote from Kindred on November 4th, 2012, 03:55 PM
well, IMO effects are overrated.
I actually tend to rate sites LESS for the more "effects" they have.
(I recently tried out a site and left, never to return, because of all the "bells and whistles" that the webmaster had installed.)
I see your point with things being too overrated, but at the same time, I think that's what alot of people are going to want or start wanting simply because it feels like that piece of software is keeping up with modern times. Let's face it, the web is obviously alot more dynamic nowadays, and if people didn't want these things, they wouldn't be used so much. This being said, there are also things that could use a nice bit of Javascript spice.


With Arantor's point about SMF's biggest problem, I agree there as well.

PS: Just took in my Beta Tester status, thank you very much!

Kindred

  • Posts: 166
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #10, on November 5th, 2012, 05:26 PM »
well, Arantor...  we'll see. :) Hopefully the rest of us who are willing to let bygones can overrule those who are stills stuck. :)


Anthony,
you give the general public too much credit.
Quote
Let's face it, the web is obviously alot more dynamic nowadays, and if people didn't want these things, they wouldn't be used so much.
As someone who is involved in the web for business, I disagree with this statement 110%. People have no idea what they "want" except what they are TOLD they should want...   dealing with marketing and sales folks, I am continually telling them "NO! I don't care what you think you heard on Jimmy Kimmel...(or whatever show they thought told them that something was 'popular'.) "

People want them because they are used... and then others follow the "trend" no matter how stupid it is.
They are not (in general) used because people want them.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #11, on November 5th, 2012, 05:41 PM »
Quote
Hopefully the rest of us who are willing to let bygones can overrule those who are stills stuck. :)
Given how quickly the topic was moved, just simply stating that Wedge is in alpha... and the fact that your own rules appear to have been creatively interpreted (where have I encountered this before? :P)...

Let's see what I mean.
Quote
* This board is for discussion of open-source forks of SMF 2.
* You may showcase your fork here, if it is an open-source fork of SMF, and if you have followed the requirements of SMF's license agreement.
* You may not showcase or advertise any non-open-source fork.
* You may discuss, analyze, compare, contrast, and post benchmark results comparing SMF and any SMF forks.
* Discussions must remain civil, respectful, polite.
* Once a moderator has been appointed, he or she will encourage posters to state their points in friendly and respectful ways.  The moderator may delete any posts which are not in keeping with the site's use policy. The moderator may request rewording of, or even delete, any posts which serve as advertisements for non-open-source forks of SMF.
The way I read this is that discussion, analysis, comparisons, contrasts and benchmarks of *any* forks are permitted, provided they are not done in a way that could be seen to be showcasing. A link wasn't posted about Wedge initially, therefore from my perspective it wasn't showcasing or advertising, it was some discussion. Though the fact it was moved into a place where more people will see it is fantastic because it's free advertising from people who wouldn't have seen it before.

Thing is, though, it doesn't matter whether Wedge goes open source. There are certain idiots who will shout down anything we do because it's not SMF doing it, and/or it's us doing it. And that's ALWAYS going to be how it is.

I would get into how hypocritical it is of SMF to consider their OWN LICENCE not open source when they spent so long claiming it was. cf SMF's own page on the subject - http://web.archive.org/web/20110721224123/http://www.simplemachines.org/about/opensource.php - but all the time SMF's doing it, it's allowed, obviously. One rule for us, one rule for them, etc.

Tell you one thing of interest, back in July 2010 when this all started, when Nao and I were talking about it... I wasn't originally interested in forking, even then as I knew about the impending licence change. I was going to start my own from scratch, because it would have avoided all this crap.

But since we're here, let's see about that forks board. Isn't it interesting how there are only two surviving forks, and the only one that anyone wants to talk about is the one that you (collectively) won't let people talk about? More than one person has come to me and said that it seems to them as if SMF feels threatened by Wedge.

Mind you, I still find it funny that forumcomplaints.com doesn't care enough to create a category for SMF complaints.

Kindred

  • Posts: 166
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #12, on November 5th, 2012, 06:56 PM »
hmmm... I've never even heard of forumcomplaints... but that is kinda funny.
Although, looking at that site, I am seriously NOT impressed with the admin in the first place....

Yeah, I can see your interpretation of the fork board rules (discussion so long as its not showcasing)... I can also see the other side (no discussion of non-open license forks)... and yes, the position is slightly hypocritical considering our previous stance on the 1.0 license, but the hell with that. LOL.  If Mitt can flip flop and give a different position every other day, why not SMF? :)

As for being threatened... no, I don't think so. At least not the main group of us... maybe some individuals.


Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #13, on November 5th, 2012, 07:05 PM »
Quote
hmmm... I've never even heard of forumcomplaints... but that is kinda funny.
Although, looking at that site, I am seriously NOT impressed with the admin in the first place....
You realise that most of the submissions are not from the admin ;)

ForumComplaints is pretty new, but the merging in of the other sites (vbulletinsucks.com, xenforosucks.com) has sort of made it bigger.
Quote
Yeah, I can see your interpretation of the fork board rules (discussion so long as its not showcasing)... I can also see the other side (no discussion of non-open license forks)... and yes, the position is slightly hypocritical considering our previous stance on the 1.0 license, but the hell with that.
That's sort of the problem - rules like that need to be consistently implemented, or removed entirely. If it were clearly and unambiguously 'open source only' for discussion, that would have been fine (though you'd still have the 'SMF is scared of Wedge' group)
Quote
If Mitt can flip flop and give a different position every other day, why not SMF?
Because you, and SMF, are better than that.
Quote
As for being threatened... no, I don't think so. At least not the main group of us... maybe some individuals.
Oh, trust me, there's enough people who feel threatened by it. Consider it this way: if people weren't threatened by it, there would be no prohibition on 'closed source' forks. As admirable as it might be to promote open source, doing so to the exclusion of closed source is a form of protectionism. It's much the same mentality as Linux advocates (and, to a lesser degree, Android advocates).

Kindred

  • Posts: 166
Re: About SMF and this project
« Reply #14, on November 5th, 2012, 07:32 PM »
Oh yes... It is indeed a form of protectionism, no argument with that at all. It was intended to be so... (and also to encourage people who are forking to use an truly open license. :) ) Although I would not agree that we're as bad as Linux is about it... lol

I saw the same was pretty new...   and I wasn't even commenting on the complaints in the system... I was complaining about the site itself.
1- I can't register. It gives me a database error when I try
2- there is no option to contact the admin to notify him of 1.
3- I am unimpressed with the organization of the site...