Whooo, we have 40,000 posts!
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
WEDGEHAMMER 40,000
Arantor
-
-
- As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
- Posts: 14,278
Drunken Clam
-
-
- Drool, drool, drool....!
- Posts: 154
Re: WEDGEHAMMER 40,000
« Reply #1, on April 28th, 2013, 05:01 PM »Last edited on April 28th, 2013, 07:10 PM
40,001 now..... and 65% of them are yours and @Nao's! :niark: :youretheboss:
Arantor
-
-
- As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
- Posts: 14,278
That's because we're very talkative.
Drunken Clam
-
-
- Drool, drool, drool....!
- Posts: 154
Re: WEDGEHAMMER 40,000
« Reply #3, on April 28th, 2013, 07:04 PM »Last edited on April 28th, 2013, 07:36 PM
That's because we're very talkative.
I know I don't contribute much but, that is possibly because I stand in total awe of what you guys have achieved, really!
I have 40 odd members, (of my old forum), keep asking me via email, "when are you opening the new forum"?. My stock reply is, "When it's ready!" lol
Seriously, this is an awesome project and you both have my very greatest respect! :cool:
Nao
- Dadman with a boy
-
-
- Posts: 16,080
That's because we're very talkative.
live627
-
-
- Should five per cent appear too small / Be thankful I don't take it all / 'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman
- Posts: 1,670
A confident man keeps quiet.whereas a frightened man keeps talking, hiding his fear.
Wanchope
-
- Posts: 234
That's because we're very talkative.
Nao
- Dadman with a boy
-
-
- Posts: 16,080
@live627, don't get me started on movies and TV... I'll kill you with my massive name-dropping!
@wanchope, it's not available because we have no reasons to go through the pains of supporting our software before it's ready -- when there's really no incentive to do so. Because supporting it also automatically means we have less leeway to work on new features, innovate and rewrite large portions of the software. It's probably the main reason why I myself haven't come to terms with that. I'm not sure about Pete. But the first 'public' release will definitely be in 2013, after the private alpha of late 2012... (Whose purpose was probably to demonstrate that it wasn't vaporware :lol:)
(Heck, we still haven't even settled on a public license and determined whether it'll be free software or commercial, things like that...)
@wanchope, it's not available because we have no reasons to go through the pains of supporting our software before it's ready -- when there's really no incentive to do so. Because supporting it also automatically means we have less leeway to work on new features, innovate and rewrite large portions of the software. It's probably the main reason why I myself haven't come to terms with that. I'm not sure about Pete. But the first 'public' release will definitely be in 2013, after the private alpha of late 2012... (Whose purpose was probably to demonstrate that it wasn't vaporware :lol:)
(Heck, we still haven't even settled on a public license and determined whether it'll be free software or commercial, things like that...)
Wanchope
-
- Posts: 234
Re: WEDGEHAMMER 40,000
« Reply #8, on April 30th, 2013, 01:13 PM »Last edited on April 30th, 2013, 02:02 PM
(Heck, we still haven't even settled on a public license and determined whether it'll be free software orcommercial, things like that...).
Opening it to Non General Public
Make the software available to the members of this community only and maybe write a simple html for and tell the interested testers to fill the form before they can download the software ...
Support Issue
Should not be allowed, maybe for now until it is in full beta release. May you call it beta 3 Alpha release.
MultiformeIngegno
-
-
- Posts: 1,337
Wedge is still open to WIDE db/structure changes. A public beta would reduce space for these changes..
Kindred
-
- Posts: 166
beta 3 alpha? really?
That is even worse than SMF's beta 3.1 or RC3-1 fiasco...
And your list of things they should do kinda defeats the purpose of a beta anyway...
Two things that both SMF and Wedge do right is that they don't release it til it is ready and they don't give release dates.
(although SMF did go too far the other way, with the whole series of 2 beta/rc - which is something that Wedge does not want to do, I assume. :) )
That is even worse than SMF's beta 3.1 or RC3-1 fiasco...
And your list of things they should do kinda defeats the purpose of a beta anyway...
Two things that both SMF and Wedge do right is that they don't release it til it is ready and they don't give release dates.
(although SMF did go too far the other way, with the whole series of 2 beta/rc - which is something that Wedge does not want to do, I assume. :) )
Nao
- Dadman with a boy
-
-
- Posts: 16,080
I'll give you an example, wanchope... Last night, I decided to try and optimize the CSS suffix system to allow for more flexibility.
Currently, if you want to include some custom CSS for IE6 and IE7 only, you can add this to your skin folder:
custom.ie[-7].css
But if you want to do that, except for yourself (admin), in case for instance you're testing something, you can't do this:
custom.ie[-7] && !admin.css
This syntax is valid inside the CSS file itself, through "@if ie[-7] && !admin / @endif", but not in the suffixes.
I was contemplating the possibility to give up on suffixes, and just force everyone to use @if, but it would be a bad decision, because these suffixes at least allow you to include additional files that you'd have a hard time including otherwise, i.e. if you don't want to put everything into "custom.css", which may quickly become a real mess...
So, I rewrote many things internally. Did many tests. Right now, I'm envisioning changing the current $user_info replacement, which is called "we::$user" (if you're unfamiliar with this syntax, it means "$user static array inside the 'we' system object", and allows you to bypass declaring a global everytime you want to use it, which is nice), and split it into more variables. Right now I have we::$user and we::$browser, but I'm probably going to go for we::$user (for regular user variables), we::$is (for anything related to the user that has 'is_' in it, such as admin or mod testing), we::$browser (no changes except removing the 'is_', tests what browser you're using), and we::$os, which currently is integrated into we::$browser, but really we don't need this to confuse us...
This is a 'convenience' change, which I'm going to do in order to make things simpler for both me and other developers in the future (unless Pete reads this before I commit later tonight, and thinks it's a bad idea.. ;)), and which isn't going to help in any other way than, as I said, clarity. This kind of change, Wedge were to be currently available, would mean that I'd think twice about it, because *plugins may need to be rewritten..!* And yes, this is one of the reasons SMF is always behind Wedge in that respect -- because they have to accomodate for all earlier mods and themes that people have written. When we started Wedge, one of the first liberating things to do was get rid of all the old code that was only there for compatibility reasons, and rewrite it in a more sensible way...
We are not gods, we are good developers and that's all, so we can't everything right on the first try. I know that my caching system, which has great complexity (but that doesn't matter because it's not to be modified by anything else than the ones who wrote it anyway), works perfectly with the current @if and suffix system, just 'differently', and I'd like to rewrite it in a way that'll be (slightly) more maintainable in the future, and account for the merging of both systems. I would really, really think twice before doing it if Wedge was public.
There are other areas that might warrant a similar rewrite, and keeping Wedge private for now entitles us to give it time to develop into a perfect system that we can really, really be proud about, and that won't require breaking rewrites in the near future.
Now, if all you want is to 'prepare' for your forum to be converted to Wedge in the future, just stick with SMF 2.1 for now, as they're doing some great work to catch up with Wedge, and have adopted many of our philosophies and thus your switch might be easier once Wedge is released, if you still want to switch of course...
Currently, if you want to include some custom CSS for IE6 and IE7 only, you can add this to your skin folder:
custom.ie[-7].css
But if you want to do that, except for yourself (admin), in case for instance you're testing something, you can't do this:
custom.ie[-7] && !admin.css
This syntax is valid inside the CSS file itself, through "@if ie[-7] && !admin / @endif", but not in the suffixes.
I was contemplating the possibility to give up on suffixes, and just force everyone to use @if, but it would be a bad decision, because these suffixes at least allow you to include additional files that you'd have a hard time including otherwise, i.e. if you don't want to put everything into "custom.css", which may quickly become a real mess...
So, I rewrote many things internally. Did many tests. Right now, I'm envisioning changing the current $user_info replacement, which is called "we::$user" (if you're unfamiliar with this syntax, it means "$user static array inside the 'we' system object", and allows you to bypass declaring a global everytime you want to use it, which is nice), and split it into more variables. Right now I have we::$user and we::$browser, but I'm probably going to go for we::$user (for regular user variables), we::$is (for anything related to the user that has 'is_' in it, such as admin or mod testing), we::$browser (no changes except removing the 'is_', tests what browser you're using), and we::$os, which currently is integrated into we::$browser, but really we don't need this to confuse us...
This is a 'convenience' change, which I'm going to do in order to make things simpler for both me and other developers in the future (unless Pete reads this before I commit later tonight, and thinks it's a bad idea.. ;)), and which isn't going to help in any other way than, as I said, clarity. This kind of change, Wedge were to be currently available, would mean that I'd think twice about it, because *plugins may need to be rewritten..!* And yes, this is one of the reasons SMF is always behind Wedge in that respect -- because they have to accomodate for all earlier mods and themes that people have written. When we started Wedge, one of the first liberating things to do was get rid of all the old code that was only there for compatibility reasons, and rewrite it in a more sensible way...
We are not gods, we are good developers and that's all, so we can't everything right on the first try. I know that my caching system, which has great complexity (but that doesn't matter because it's not to be modified by anything else than the ones who wrote it anyway), works perfectly with the current @if and suffix system, just 'differently', and I'd like to rewrite it in a way that'll be (slightly) more maintainable in the future, and account for the merging of both systems. I would really, really think twice before doing it if Wedge was public.
There are other areas that might warrant a similar rewrite, and keeping Wedge private for now entitles us to give it time to develop into a perfect system that we can really, really be proud about, and that won't require breaking rewrites in the near future.
Now, if all you want is to 'prepare' for your forum to be converted to Wedge in the future, just stick with SMF 2.1 for now, as they're doing some great work to catch up with Wedge, and have adopted many of our philosophies and thus your switch might be easier once Wedge is released, if you still want to switch of course...
Arantor
-
-
- As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
- Posts: 14,278
I will note that only a handful of those who got beta access previously actually bothered to say anything to us afterwards, distinct lack of feedback all round, really.
There is also the other problem: if we were to do a release right now, aside from all the changes still to come, you'll complain that it's buggy and/or unfinished... well, duh, we know. There are still a number of unfinished areas, still a number of things that just don't work properly, some that probably just need to be removed entirely (I'm thinking the alternate theme area, and certainly the editing-from-the-admin-panel stuff)
Right now, complaining that you can't have awesome stuff is a better complaint than complaining about how not awesome it is.
Oh, and if you were *really* interested in what we're doing, you'd be reading more of the forum and replying. Not just moaning (now on multiple occasions) about how you can't have it yet.
There is also the other problem: if we were to do a release right now, aside from all the changes still to come, you'll complain that it's buggy and/or unfinished... well, duh, we know. There are still a number of unfinished areas, still a number of things that just don't work properly, some that probably just need to be removed entirely (I'm thinking the alternate theme area, and certainly the editing-from-the-admin-panel stuff)
Right now, complaining that you can't have awesome stuff is a better complaint than complaining about how not awesome it is.
Oh, and if you were *really* interested in what we're doing, you'd be reading more of the forum and replying. Not just moaning (now on multiple occasions) about how you can't have it yet.
Wanchope
-
- Posts: 234
Re: WEDGEHAMMER 40,000
« Reply #13, on May 1st, 2013, 02:33 PM »Last edited on May 1st, 2013, 08:52 PM
@Kindred
Something more 'complex' or funny will for sure draw attentions (in computer world). Why is Google giving versions Android food names. Jelly Bean, Ice Cream Sandwich... one day they will run out of food names and may start with things that are more wired. There is a myth that computer programs with complex names are always complex. Something like Beta 3 Alpha 0.0012 RC 1.8 will 'scare' second world webmasters out of their skins :)
@Nao
Good work but I don't listen to anyone that complained that my forum is not great in IE6 or even IE7. My standard reply 'is this 2013 not 1999'. Upgrade your browser.
@Arantor
Just I found out about Wegde at anotheradminforum.com
Thanks.
Something more 'complex' or funny will for sure draw attentions (in computer world). Why is Google giving versions Android food names. Jelly Bean, Ice Cream Sandwich... one day they will run out of food names and may start with things that are more wired. There is a myth that computer programs with complex names are always complex. Something like Beta 3 Alpha 0.0012 RC 1.8 will 'scare' second world webmasters out of their skins :)
@Nao
Good work but I don't listen to anyone that complained that my forum is not great in IE6 or even IE7. My standard reply 'is this 2013 not 1999'. Upgrade your browser.
@Arantor
Just I found out about Wegde at anotheradminforum.com
Thanks.
Kindred
-
- Posts: 166
wanchope... you have missed the point of standardized nomenclature.\
Yes, Android gives releases food names.
You will note that whatever codename they give development, they don't actually mess with the nomenclature of the release structure.
"JellyBean" is officially Android OS, release 4.1.0
you can not have a beta alpha RC. that just does not make any sense.
You should never have anything other than ONE level and whole numbers.
in other words.
Alpha
Beta
RC1
maybe RC2
gold release.
(Although SMF is known for having multiple betas, that has more to do with the widespread use of the betas and the fact that they don't get many bugs reported on beta1
Yes, Android gives releases food names.
You will note that whatever codename they give development, they don't actually mess with the nomenclature of the release structure.
"JellyBean" is officially Android OS, release 4.1.0
you can not have a beta alpha RC. that just does not make any sense.
You should never have anything other than ONE level and whole numbers.
in other words.
Alpha
Beta
RC1
maybe RC2
gold release.
(Although SMF is known for having multiple betas, that has more to do with the widespread use of the betas and the fact that they don't get many bugs reported on beta1