Topic: Some updates on SMF 2.1

[4Kstore]

* emanuele feels a horde of people coming from behind...

* emanuele runs!

[Yoshi]

And that makes me wonder if I should suggest to change the customization guidelines to make mandatory the use of hooks when possible...

I know this is not the right topic, but I quite agree, this avoids conflicts with other mods as much as possible.

[ahrasis]

Nice. (Almost) full implementation of css replacing most images. I have done that somewhere. The expand/shrink or up/down icon, need not be that big. It's ugly anyway. Try a smaller one. I would also sugest css icon based on html code (I can't remember where did I see one but you can search it of course).

A tooltip replacing poster's info is nice. I have put up this idea somewhere before (I think may not be here but in bloc's forum somewhere). But preferably, a simple avatar/picture is enough. Too much details shown are not necessary but may be left as an option whether to show or not to show.

The design of boardindex should be fully changed or at least an option whether to use that or a new homepage for SMF. I think bloc has some idea on that. It should, IMHO, show more details like topic, topic starter with smaller avatar/picture, in which board and few latest responses to it. A more like forum member's activity page to be precise. A member can choose whether to show all activity in the forum or just his buddy/friends plus recent or active (recently replied / commented) activity.

I haven't register yet, so I may not see other features. But do consider what people have long asked from SMF that is topic/post like system. Karma system on the other hand should be just a mod.

A mention/tag system and activity streaming center as opposed to information center? (monotiz has done these), a new and better profile page (like simplenetwork mod?), are all to be considered.

Lastly, javascript that expand/shrink the quick login form is a bit disturbing. If I choose to shrink it and go to another page, it will expand and shrink back. This is ugly. Do check that out too.

Overall, it looks just like SMF in SMF ways. I am not really sure whether I like or not but, it do has some improvements though may be not a major one and may be not to the satisfaction of all. Besides, who can satisfy everybody.

I wish the team, good luck and all the best.

[Kindred]

meh... I disagree there...
I hate the hidden poster info.
But then again, that's what customization and custom themes are for.

and as for the rest of your new suggestions. How that Alpha is released, it should be considered feature frozen. Fix the issues, release a beta, RC and final... and move on.

Additionally, most of what you ask for is mod material, IMO.

[Bloc]

Ah, the joys of building a default theme.. Its never going to be nice for everyone, and its always one or two staff members that want their view in on it as well. So you change..and change..until your original idea is watered out and all your excitement over it are gone(..).

I'd say, ship SMF with the blandest theme ever, and let the users hunt for better third-party themes, where the constraints of making something unique isn't present. Its the logical solution.

[maxg]

Ah, the joys of building a default theme.. Its never going to be nice for everyone, and its always one or two staff members that want their view in on it as well. So you change..and change..until your original idea is watered out and all your excitement over it are gone(..).

I'd say, ship SMF with the blandest theme ever, and let the users hunt for better third-party themes, where the constraints of making something unique isn't present. Its the logical solution.

Agreed .... there are many who love to make and or customize themes, so this should of less priority like Bloc says and possibly more time devoted on the main system and moving forward>>. I mentioned, I like theme and I do and I have already started working on and experimenting with it, if another is to come it should be something real skinny or clean! I feel there just to many things to get get lost in, like Bloc suggests.

I do not post much here but I'm at many sites, help and pushing to keep SMF alive and kicking and that's what I care most about.... 4 me doing themes is fun using SMF and I hope it stays that way LOL!

regards,
Maxx

[Gary]

I'd say, ship SMF with the blandest theme ever, and let the users hunt for better third-party themes, where the constraints of making something unique isn't present. Its the logical solution.

Okay, black text on a white background with blue and purple links it is.

[Kindred]

hey...   I said that I didn't like it...   but me not liking it is fine because I can always install a custom theme that has it back the way that I think it should be.

[butchs]

Yikes, from one extreme to the other.  There should be a compromise between the theme artist and the staff members.

A bland theme will be a regression!  I for one believe, the default theme should be written to be state of the art and allow further modification via hooks...

[Kindred]

But, butchs... What is "state of the art?"

Everyone has very definite ideas on the layout and themes...  I know what I like.., and I don't really like the new default. But, as I said, it doesn't matter...   Because I can and will just add a custom theme to replace it. All of the bugs I have reported have to do with functionality, not aesthetics, or lack thereof.

[Sunburned Goose]

I like the idea of software platforms providing a simple, straightforward, and consistent look and feel that is maintainable so that it is the same look and feel throughout versions.  You're effectively building a brand with that theme. 

I also appreciate products that take the time to highlight the best work of their community to demonstrate demonstrate the capability of the platform.  Draw attention to those who are volunteering their time to build great themes and mods for the community.  It builds good relationships and it lets consumers know that this developer did something right and should be emulated (license permitting ).
Goose.

[maxg]

I don't really think anyone is thinking about a completely plain theme, at least I'm not. I mentioned a few times already, that I like this theme and find it nice and fun to work with.... I would only ask, that rather than changing it or adding more themes, that we the "user" as mentioned above, note any bugs found and post them or post the solutions if any and  not add more paint to an already good painting, it will just ruin it, like also mentioned before>>  it may cause for frustration and or lost of interest, with too many cooks, changing the taste of the soup.

You have a good theme >>!<< after the bugs and issues, if any, are ironed out... then the "Themer" can come up with what they think others will need or like!

There are other things, need be concentrated on! JMHO..

You can please some people sometimes, but never all people all the time!

regards,
Maxx

[emanuele]

True, true.

Though I think that the idea of a "plain" theme is not that bad. In fact it's something I think it would be very interesting to explore.
A "simple" (both in the appearance and in the customizability) default theme would encourage more people to find their way to new looks and not just install the software and that's all.
Of course a "simple" default theme would probably be difficult to "sell" because many people want everything already set-up and working... especially nowadays: one-click install, one-click ordering, etc.

[AAAAAAAA]

Will SMF 2.0 themes work with SMF 2.1?
Has SM implemented theme version check, so you can't install a SMF 1 theme in SMF 2.1?

[Irisado]

I'm still with Kindred on the lack of profile information displayed with the user name.  Given that the layout of this was, in my opinion, very good in 2.0, I don't really understand why it had to be changed for 2.1.  It's just a cosmetic change which takes away individuality from users, and introduces excessive homogeneity to the appearance of posts (i.e. you have to hover with the mouse to see most of the details).

I know that my view won't make any difference at all, and I'm also aware that someone is bound to make a theme which restores all of this information, but my reason for posting this is I would be interested to know why this change was made, because I just don't understand the reasoning.

[emanuele]

Will SMF 2.0 themes work with SMF 2.1?

No idea, but I guess not.

Has SM implemented theme version check, so you can't install a SMF 1 theme in SMF 2.1?

Nope.

[maxg]

Will SMF 2.0 themes work with SMF 2.1?

No idea, but I guess not.

Has SM implemented theme version check, so you can't install a SMF 1 theme in SMF 2.1?

Nope.

To be honest I have been toying with the 2.02 theme on the Alpha already and only find minor  issue that could be worked out with out much Hazel I'd think, what I found is the following.

all main stuff works find so far, from the user member point of view, the only issues I find are  on and with the Admin parts, of none SMF 2.1 Alpha default themes:

admin menu bread crumbs > the admen menu messy. the admin main window has trouble with the Iframe used for version history!
unable to parse a complete Duplication of the default theme, and after edits in the current theme and or theme settings, you are unable to save your edits, in FF browser, but I do them off line and upload via FTP. Note the admin issue are present in the duped Default theme unless you transfer the admin.css to that duped theme, before working with it because it like I said is not parsed with the create new theme option in the admin section

Like I said  so far minor stuff. also amt find some portals my need some tweaking! But as I learn more about these little things I shall post them and later will post some screens.

Other wise from your visitor or user's view, they work find so far, But I need to test more theme, I done only a few 2.02 themes so far! looking great >>!

regards,
Maxx

[Bloc]

But Kindred..your post is exactly what wrong with building a default theme, there are too many opinions. While you are not team member now, and your opinion isn't meant as a critique this time, its a sign of whats in store for anyone trying to create a default theme.

Which is why a bland, no-frills theme is a good solution.

But...then you loose all uniqueness with the software, as its not recognized anymore as "ah, THAT forum script" purely on the looks.

As for objections to changes..where do you draw the line? If a senior member for the team says he don't like the user posts, does that count as it having to be changed? What if Irisado here said it, should her opinion be taken into account? Should the designer have FULL freedom? or should it be done the google way, one tiny step at a time, with 5 variations of everything..

I think I know the answers to all of these already, but it always helpful to ask them again. Arriving at current default theme have not been a straight line, nor was it a true and unique idea put into form. Its a compromise, a good one..I like how it turned out, but nonetheless, its not something "new".

maybe its a question of whether forum software should really change or not, whether the way of showing posts as discussions, with lots of info and signatures repeated several times(like any good ad manager lol) is the ONLY way to show people discussing.

I think not. The discussion itself have taken a minor seat to all the extra info, to make people participate more. But do they participate more if they just fill out lots of info about themselves? Isn't the DISCUSS part the most important? Little thought have been given to that (AFAIK): how to make people engage more without building a "pseudo" home for them in offering all kinds of personal info areas.

[AAAAAAAA]

The new default looks nothing like SMF. It's up to themers to make themes not looking like SMF, not the team itself.
Removing all SMF icons and images, is IMO not the way to go. I also don't understand why this is done. You have the cus. team to make the original icons more modern, instead of just using standard web site icons.

[Suki]

The new default looks nothing like SMF. It's up to themers to make themes not looking like SMF, not the team itself.
Removing all SMF icons and images, is IMO not the way to go. I also don't understand why this is done. You have the cus. team to make the original icons more modern, instead of just using standard web site icons.

Fell free to fork the repo and make your changes as you see fit.