Hello all,
Simple Machines is pleased to announce that smCore project has joined Simple Machines, and will be the core on which SMF 3.0 will be built.
The smCore project will be working to develop a platform for development of future versions of SMF and other large modules such as a blog, portal or CMS, gallery, and other large and desirable parts of a community-based website. Currently, many of these things are hacked onto the forum and live as second-class citizens on your website. But SMF developers had always envisioned a set of website "simple machines" to do most of the hard work of the forum and all the other essential pieces of your community-based website.
What is smCore?
smCore will be a "core" of reusable code that will provide the basis for the development of future versions of SMF. It will be like a library of functions and classes. Other developers will use it to write future versions of SMF, or any other compatible module they can dream up to integrate with future versions of SMF. When you install those future versions, smCore code will be part of it. It will make customizing and maintaining your forum easier.
What smCore is not
smCore will not do anything all on its own. Forum administrators will not download it directly. It will not be any of the Simple Machines products you love using -- it will make the Simple Machines products you love work better.
The History of the smCore Idea
The smCore project is based on some ideas that have been kicking around since at least 2005. SMF Developers always wanted to redesign SMF in the future, to be written as a forum module plugged in a reusable core. More recently, a number of former SMF developers, SMF friends, and other contributors put some serious work into a "core" project. Some of you may remember the extraordinary rush of new ideas, and the brainstorming that went into envisioning a usable and reusable core for multiple web applications (including a forum). This initiative happened at the same time that Simple Machines was restructuring itself, and at the same time that the SMF team was bringing out the final version of SMF 2.0. The discussion was invigorating -- a wonderful experience and valuable source of ideas and analysis, choices and trade-offs.
The smCore project is embedding many of these same ideas and will become a platform that will support the future SMF. The smCore project will work closely with the SMF project to ensure that the core code can support the needs of the best-in-class forum software. At the same time, the smCore project will seek to encourage and work with other developers on other highly-desirable website modules. The SMF developer team has already embraced smCore as the basis for the future of SMF, and is committed to working with the smCore team to see it through.
Features we aim to provide in smCore
* Built-in extensibility and a plug-in system, to make it possible to add code to the software without editing the core files. This capability will exceed what was accomplished in SMF 2.0, with the introduction of hooks and a little API.
* Better theming system. It will be easier and build, maintain, tweak, and customize great themes.
* Ability to integrate with other essential website components -- blog CMS, gallery, etc, without writing an external integration. Modules written using the smCore platform can be instantly compatible with each other. You won't need to install any modules you don't need, but you will be able to add them on just by checking a box and clicking "install". This is a feature the community has been asking for for a long time.
To learn more about the future of SMF, please see the Development blog: The Future Of SMF (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=469381).
To learn more about the smCore project, please visit the smCore website at http://smcore.org (http://smcore.org)
To learn more about Simple Machines, please visit the Simple Machines website at http://simplemachines.org (http://simplemachines.org)
Awesome news!
Congrats! :)
I like the idea of integrating the blog, gallery and so forth as part of the installation but it will mean you will have to watch out for vulnerabilities and bugs even more than before.
Simply awesome! Can't wait for this to all come into place!
Awesome Plan! 8)
Very good it.
Its just awesome ...... I hope it releases soon ;)
Much eager now :)
Interesting.
Congrats once again :)
Awesome....looking forward to use it!
Happy coding! ;-)
3.0 already?? :o Lol, looking forward to seeing the products of this.
Congratulations! :D
Quote from: Jaekob Caed on February 24, 2012, 05:17:26 PM
3.0 already?? :o Lol, looking forward to seeing the products of this.
You'll have more than enough time to get comfortable with 2.1 before we pull the rug out from under you with 3.0 :P
Lol, I figured that, I was just joking around. ;)
QuoteWhat is smCore?
smCore will be a "core" of reusable code that will provide the basis for the development of future versions of SMF. It will be like a library of functions and classes. Other developers will use it to write future versions of SMF, or any other compatible module they can dream up to integrate with future versions of SMF. When you install those future versions, smCore code will be part of it. It will make customizing and maintaining your forum easier.
What smCore is not
smCore will not do anything all on its own. Forum administrators will not download it directly. It will not be any of the Simple Machines products you love using -- it will make the Simple Machines products you love work better.
Am I missing something here ? If theres no core to install what do the modules hook onto? We will initially need the core to use wont we? It sounds good mind but this is confusing a bit!
Quote from: nightbre on February 24, 2012, 06:18:16 PM
QuoteWhat is smCore?
smCore will be a "core" of reusable code that will provide the basis for the development of future versions of SMF. It will be like a library of functions and classes. Other developers will use it to write future versions of SMF, or any other compatible module they can dream up to integrate with future versions of SMF. When you install those future versions, smCore code will be part of it. It will make customizing and maintaining your forum easier.
What smCore is not
smCore will not do anything all on its own. Forum administrators will not download it directly. It will not be any of the Simple Machines products you love using -- it will make the Simple Machines products you love work better.
Am I missing something here ? If theres no core to install what do the modules hook onto? We will initially need the core to use wont we? It sounds good mind but this is confusing a bit!
The plan is for core to be included with the forum. So it wouldn't be a separate download.
Ah right i see. I got the impression that the smf forum was going to be an addon too for the core like the rest of the possible modules going to be created. :)
Well done to the SMCore team. :-)
Quote from: nightbre on February 24, 2012, 06:22:05 PM
Ah right i see. I got the impression that the smf forum was going to be an addon too for the core like the rest of the possible modules going to be created. :)
I don't want to re-confuse you, but that's technically correct. It's just that >99% of the users will just download a package that's "SMF 3.0 + smCore" without even having to think about it. You'll just see it as installing SMF, which just happens to include smCore. Kind of like your car includes an engine, but you don't have to buy both separately :)
This is awesome news for Simple Machines and for the future of SMF!
Good news :D
Glad to see this is happening - this is something I was strongly in favour of doing but ran out of steam - I really hope it takes off.
Hopefully this works out well. Congrats on the progress.
~RedOne
Nice to see this talent back home :)
I was waiting for this for a long time.
Quote* Better theming system. It will be easier and build, maintain, tweak, and customize great themes.
Excellent! I look forward to 3.0.
Very good news
forum http://smcore.org display me after registration:
QuoteAn Error Has Occurred!
Sorry Guest, you are banned from using this forum!
You have been banned from this site.
This ban is not set to expire.
Quote from: Adren on February 26, 2012, 12:14:18 PM
forum display me after registration:
QuoteAn Error Has Occurred!
Sorry Guest, you are banned from using this forum!
You have been banned from this site.
This ban is not set to expire.
Might be better to post this in the Site Comments board (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?board=19.0 (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?board=19.0))
but http://smcore.org not http://www.simplemachines.org :)
Adren, I send you a PM. I made the message more clear, as well.
It's okay if you report on site comments eventually because we'll find it, although you're right too. :)
Great news! Can't just wait to explore SMF 3.0....
I'm not being pessimistic, (well maybe i am, but who can blame me after waiting half a decade for 2.0 final?) but isn't all that code talk going to be a huge project which will require even more resources to develop than 2.0? I guess a sensible ETA for 3.0 would be seriously not before 2020. 3.0 doesn't seem to be a fork of SMF but something quite innovative, and all the years i've been here in this community, i've learned (painfully) to dread the word "innovative" as it either meant impossible to make or several years to release.
As for 2.0 and subsequently 2.1, why not concentrate the current efforts to fix all those hundreds of bugs from the tracker before moving on to develop 3.0. As an admin with several forums running on SMF software, i would be much more at ease knowing that most of the bugs are fixed, so even if it takes a decade to release 3.0, i'll be at peace and wait for as long as possible. Obviously, if it takes 10 years then i would most probably be using another forum software by then as the SMF software would have become outdated.
Honestly, this announcement feels like an incredibly risky move, knowing the gigantic/desperate problems and record-breaking lengthy development time that the SMF community suffered before 2.0 was finally ready. Don't get me wrong, i care a lot about SMF and i definitely love the ideas here, but without a rock-solid foundation and a sufficiently large number of developers on the SMF team, that project is going to cut all the air out of the current 2.0 and 2.1 project, making everything come to a stand-still and maybe even alienate many team members like before. Oh no... The nightmares are rushing back!
The SMF development team needs to rebuild itself and gather together all the great minds here before going in to tackle such an ambitious project for 3.0. I really want 3.0 but then i would rather just get constant updates every few months than wait 5+ years for an unfinished product. I believe that the average time for a new version should be 1-2 years at most, based on development time at all the other major forum software.
Just speaking for myself (as one of the developers for smCore and SMF 3.0), I don't see us competing with the other major forum software if we put off 3.0 and a new code base any longer. The more time we spend on 2.x, the more time we spend lagging behind the people who are writing modern, innovative code. That being said, 2.x still needs work to solidify it and squash the remaining bugs, and Spuds/emanuele/Antechinus are doing a great job from what I've seen.
As much as I'd love to see more developers working on both 2.1 and 3.0, we're working with what we've got. If more people come along to help out, which is what we want to encourage with a more open development model, then it would certainly speed things up. The biggest problems with 2.0 taking five years to reach gold were developer turnover, writing a custom WYSIWYG editor (which still has bugs, iirc - I don't use it), and feature creep. While we can't guarantee we won't run into any problems like those, as we can't predict the future, we can certainly try our hardest to watch out for them and get a solid product out in a far shorter amount of time.
/me likes the hard-hitting comments like yours, they make me want to write better/more code :P
Congrats! ;)
Totally legitimate worries sharks! While there was a plethora of issues that plagued the development of SMF, we certainly aim and hope that we do not see those days again. As far as your concerns about continuing to work on the SMF2.x line, this is just not maintainable nor really feasible. SMF is already behind in development and present coding practices. The move to OOP programming and to have a core framework is very much needed. It really is the only way forward for SMF for a mountain of reasons.
sharks, expect to see bug fixes for 2.0 in a future release. We are not abandoning the 2.x line yet.
Good news! Changes with SMF licence was a big step ahead and we see results now and in future :)
Quote from: sharks on February 26, 2012, 04:12:43 PM
Honestly, this announcement feels like an incredibly risky move, knowing the gigantic/desperate problems and record-breaking lengthy development time that the SMF community suffered before 2.0 was finally ready. Don't get me wrong, i care a lot about SMF and i definitely love the ideas here, but without a rock-solid foundation and a sufficiently large number of developers on the SMF team, that project is going to cut all the air out of the current 2.0 and 2.1 project, making everything come to a stand-still and maybe even alienate many team members like before.
1+
Without a lot of new programmer with a very good know how in OOP and all other, this project is dead before starts. My 2 cent...
Unless a project starts nobody can work on it.
Unless we start using OOP in SMF it's very unlikely that developers with good knowledges of OOP would be (deeply) attracted by it.
Use OOP on the current code base could be not the easiest thing to do and probably not even the most attractive (it's mostly a rewrite of the entire code, you can take it piece by piece, but in the end means rewrite it).
The development of smCore and 3.0 will be for sure more open in respect to what SMF's development has been in the past, so many more people will be able to join and demonstrate their skills.
As far as I remember it's also easier to improve code in an OOP code base rather than in a procedural one.
So I understand your fears, they are absolutely legitimate, but I also think that break legacy and move forward is also something that must be done at a certain point.
Quote from: feline on February 27, 2012, 08:09:03 AM
1+
Without a lot of new programmer with a very good know how in OOP and all other, this project is dead before starts. My 2 cent...
When the coffin is ready let me know I'll go buy the nails! :P
Quote from: emanuele on February 27, 2012, 11:18:44 AM
When the coffin is ready let me know I'll go buy the nails! :P
You're better than you think ... But thinking is not your strength. :P
emanuele doesn't have to think, we just push a button on the back of his head and out pops code :) definitely a wonderful robotic team member
Quote from: feline on February 27, 2012, 04:27:30 PM
Quote from: emanuele on February 27, 2012, 11:18:44 AM
When the coffin is ready let me know I'll go buy the nails! :P
You're better than you think ... But thinking is not your strength. :P
You're better than you speak... But speaking is not your strength. :P
(http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/forum/smileyvault-popcorn.gif)
good to hear this is finally public, i remember sitting in the conference room at a motel in Tucson at the MoTM hearing about all this, as for 2.0 bugs being transferred over to 3,0, simply as 3.0 is not same style as previous releases the bugs that are on 2.0 will not exist.
Quote from: Fustrate on February 27, 2012, 04:43:03 PM
emanuele doesn't have to think, we just push a button on the back of his head and out pops code :) definitely a wonderful robotic team member
And you are lucky: at my old job I was only able to pop out numbers! :P
Good news... this!
An interesting thought I had reading over some OOP literature is how will a server be effected as in OOP 3.0 v 2.2 smf for overall consumption of bandwith and server resources ? Ive got no other sites running that can compare but was wondering if the initial thoughts from the dev team touched on this at an smf level in general.
You wouldn't see any difference.
Quote from: nightbre on February 27, 2012, 11:13:52 PM
An interesting thought I had reading over some OOP literature is how will a server be effected as in OOP 3.0 v 2.2 smf for overall consumption of bandwith and server resources ? Ive got no other sites running that can compare but was wondering if the initial thoughts from the dev team touched on this at an smf level in general.
Bandwidth won't change one byte from procedural to OO - it doesn't change what data is sent to/from your site.
Resources should ideally go down from 2.x to 3.0, but as always it depends on the server. If you're worried about server resources and haven't installed an opcode cache and moved away from Apache, there are larger things to worry about than OOP :)
I just had those users in mind who get hammered for usage ect by slick hosts promising the earth but not delivering. I also wondered since a whole script isnt run and only the relative data accessed in oop as per module then technically shouldnt the queries go down giving a lower usage and faster page load? I just finished a 10 hour shift btw so might be a bit too sleepy atm to make real sense. :)
I cant wait to see the cogs in this new engine! ;)
There are things we're doing that should reduce resource usage, like lazy loading the database connection so that we don't open a connection that can go unused. We're also going to have smarter caching and (hopefully) cleaner code, so that bugs are easier to prevent/spot/fix. You're definitely on the right track of what we need to do :)
About time... hope this will be followed up by the real effort involved making such changes and providing the addons like a gallery etc. Already divergent mods out there so will be interesting to see how the developer personalities play out on this.
:P
And a unified portal??? Or would it just make it easier for people to keep writing their own versions perhaps.
Hope it works, even if only half of the intentions make it.
This is great news, I'm glad SMF is taking this direction.
A good improvement, for sure.
sound good, congrats
Interesting. Pleas just don't turn into Wordpress or something equally terrible. With the plans to incorporate all kinds of modules, I'm afraid of more problems and the whole thing not being too "simple". But, I'm no developer so I'll just sit back and watch how this turns out.
But SMF is my favorite software I've worked with so far, so I'm optimistic about it all. Best of luck!
Wordpress is badly written and horribly inefficient. As a direct consequence, it's slooooooow, moreso with plugins.
Quote from: Norv* Ability to integrate with other essential website components -- blog CMS, gallery, etc, without writing an external integration. Modules written using the smCore platform can be instantly compatible with each other. You won't need to install any modules you don't need, but you will be able to add them on just by checking a box and clicking "install".
Great innovation,is this similar with Drupal´s add-on modules and designs. Which they offer in Drupal core files
anything related to the development of SMF is a good thing.
Going to smcore.org and after a rapid check, it seems you are planing to use some Symfony component if not the entiere Sf2 framework, isn't it? At which point is Symfony going to be involved?
I think it's a good choice. I know PHPBB4 will also be built around Symfony 2, as well as Drupal 8 with some components.
So good luck, I'm myself working on a Sf2 website with a SMF2 forum ^^ :laugh:
There are no plans to use Symfony. We were discussing other frameworks to use to get a start.
We're only using their YAML parsing component - PHP doesn't have YAML built in like it does with JSON, but it's a very good configuration format.
We also have a few components from Zend Framework in there, which *will* be replaced over time. It's just that we can get going faster if we don't have to write a whole database layer right off the bat.
Is there a rough ETA on any of this?
Nope all we will say is that it be ready when its ready
Quote from: David111567 on March 06, 2012, 06:31:01 PM
Is there a rough ETA on any of this?
We never put any dates out there for stuff that is done on volunteer time. If I were to hope, I'd hope that we could see a beta by next year. But that is just me "hoping". :) Inbetween now and then though, we should see SMF 2.1 for sure.
Quote from: IchBin™ on March 06, 2012, 09:19:13 PM
Quote from: David111567 on March 06, 2012, 06:31:01 PM
Is there a rough ETA on any of this?
We never put any dates out there for stuff that is done on volunteer time. If I were to hope, I'd hope that we could see a beta by next year. But that is just me "hoping". :) Inbetween now and then though, we should see SMF 2.1 for sure.
If your
still at it after 21st December then take as long as you like ;) , if your not still at it after this date I doubt it matters! ;D ;D
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Exploding_planet.jpg)
*GASP*
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0fwc9iWql1qb0c64o1_500.jpg)
Hehe read that properly it contradicts itself! Without the extra day it would be 514 days ago! You cannot subtract days to equal a future date. Im sure that a few noted scientists have also worked the date aspect out for authenticity but irrespective of the consequences in any way shape or form or nothing as it likely will be. :)
Quote from: IchBin™ on March 07, 2012, 01:59:34 PM
*GASP*
*snip*
Incorrect. The Mayan calendar is extremely precise, unlike the Gregorian calendar, and therefore does not need leap days.
The whole thing's a load of crock anyways, but leap days aren't a reason why.
Man you guys take things way to seriously....
/topic kill
Great news, looking forward to yet another great release of SMF :)
Quote from: IchBin™ on March 07, 2012, 02:30:39 PM
Man you guys take things way to seriously....
/topic kill
Its your fault, im blaming you and denying it all lol I just joked! :D Im sure we will all be fine on the 22nd ;)
We are all looking forward to when this super duper new build finally hits the world and hope you all have some enlightening times along the way. :)
Quote from: Fustrate on March 06, 2012, 11:13:43 AM
We're only using their YAML parsing component - PHP doesn't have YAML built in like it does with JSON, but it's a very good configuration format.
We also have a few components from Zend Framework in there, which *will* be replaced over time. It's just that we can get going faster if we don't have to write a whole database layer right off the bat.
Thanks for the answer. I guess I just checked the topic on yml and quickly get into some false conclusion :lol
Also, I saw Twig templates and some code organisation that reminded me of Symfony :)
Congrats!
(http://images.cooltext.com/2520973.png)
Thinking about SMF 3.0 makes me very excited! I don't think I'll ever switch to 2.0, it's just not really much different in terms of functionality, only in the code. But if 3.0 has new features, that would be awesome! I'd like to see a Xenforo-esque approach to certain things while still maintaining what makes SMF great :)
actually there is a masive difference in functionality between 1.1.x and 2.0.x ... also your site gives a nice big error message at top
It sounds very exciting but also a lot of work... good luck!
I like the theme you are using on smCore... Dziner Studio puts out some very classy themes.
Cheers!
I look forward to hearing more about it.
karls alive!!! :)
Quote from: Runic on March 12, 2012, 06:02:21 PM
karls alive!!! :)
Sooty never dies, he just takes a nap with Sue.
~RedOne
Quote from: Runic on March 09, 2012, 06:12:51 PM
actually there is a masive difference in functionality between 1.1.x and 2.0.x ... also your site gives a nice big error message at top
The error is an annoying database loading issue with my host, basically sometimes authentication times out and then SSI spits back the load error. I've been after them for weeks now to fix it and they just keep ducking out >_<
Quote from: MetalMusicMan on March 14, 2012, 12:08:14 PM
Quote from: Runic on March 09, 2012, 06:12:51 PM
actually there is a masive difference in functionality between 1.1.x and 2.0.x ... also your site gives a nice big error message at top
The error is an annoying database loading issue with my host, basically sometimes authentication times out and then SSI spits back the load error. I've been after them for weeks now to fix it and they just keep ducking out >_<
Are you, by any chance, hosting with 000webhost?
Quote from: Yoshi2889 on March 14, 2012, 12:17:44 PM
Quote from: MetalMusicMan on March 14, 2012, 12:08:14 PM
Quote from: Runic on March 09, 2012, 06:12:51 PM
actually there is a masive difference in functionality between 1.1.x and 2.0.x ... also your site gives a nice big error message at top
The error is an annoying database loading issue with my host, basically sometimes authentication times out and then SSI spits back the load error. I've been after them for weeks now to fix it and they just keep ducking out >_<
Are you, by any chance, hosting with 000webhost?
Negative. I use 1&1, unfortunately.
Quote from: MetalMusicMan on March 14, 2012, 12:19:22 PM
Quote from: Yoshi2889 on March 14, 2012, 12:17:44 PM
Quote from: MetalMusicMan on March 14, 2012, 12:08:14 PM
Quote from: Runic on March 09, 2012, 06:12:51 PM
actually there is a masive difference in functionality between 1.1.x and 2.0.x ... also your site gives a nice big error message at top
The error is an annoying database loading issue with my host, basically sometimes authentication times out and then SSI spits back the load error. I've been after them for weeks now to fix it and they just keep ducking out >_<
Are you, by any chance, hosting with 000webhost?
Negative. I use 1&1, unfortunately.
Sorry, then I can't help you either, I guess :(
I've had that same experience with 000webhost. Fixed by moving away.
It's weird because I had no issues at all for about a year, then it started doing this seemingly for no reason about 2 months ago :\
May I suggest to open a new topic if you want to discuss about hosting and differences between 1.1 and 2.0 (http://wiki.simplemachines.org/smf/Differences_between_SMF_2.0_and_SMF_1.1)?
If you want I can split the last posts from this topic. ;)
Quote from: emanuele on March 16, 2012, 04:56:46 AM
May I suggest to open a new topic if you want to discuss about hosting and differences between 1.1 and 2.0 (http://wiki.simplemachines.org/smf/Differences_between_SMF_2.0_and_SMF_1.1)?
If you want I can split the last posts from this topic. ;)
By all means-- my apologies for taking things off course.
Nothing to apologies. ;)
When are released?
when ready
So, one question. Will Simple Machines be the people to develop the smCore and will Simple Machines make another software except for forum software based on the smCore architecture?
Maybe... It depend on th interest of he developers
Another question... what does "smCore" do? I've looked at their website but I really can't find out what it does. The introduction to this topic doesn't help much.
It provides a reliable base for the forum to plug into.
great news :)
Congratulations, and good luck guys! :)
Ok, so after reading most of the posts here, I finally got it... The way I'm looking at it, is this...
smCore = Bunch of functions that can be used by anything (Basically the core of ANYTHING).
SMF = modification package that uses smCore (1 of those anythings mentioned above).
Anything else = modification package that uses smCore or it's own functions.
This sounds AWESOME! And I'm glad that you guys are doing this, cause this will promote more advanced modifications, ideas, basically anything would be possible. Sounds great!
Good Luck!
Well, the terminology is a bit off... kind of makes SMF seem like a tiny little thing :P smCore is a platform (database, permissions, file IO, etc.) and SMF is a module (large package that sits on top of smCore and uses it to get stuff done), with current mods being plugins for smCore that require SMF and affect SMF's functionality.
/me likes words
Quote...with current mods being plugins for smCore that require SMF and affect SMF's functionality.
Oh, ok, I was under the impression that their could be another forum or whatever code that could even use the smCore, that bypasses SMF completely. Cause than, if this were possible, it would definitely be more impressive. Well, just the same, should be interesting.
That could happen, if plugin developers are clever enough (and if there's another forum that uses smCore, which is a possibility).
Well, than that's pretty cool than...
good news..
Nice, a repo, may jump in from time to time. This is something that needed to be done a while back, makes suggesting new fixes less trouble some. I am watching it now, hence I don't get the whole structure and all yet.
My github is sicommnend. ;D
Quote from: nend on April 10, 2012, 11:26:26 AM
Nice, a repo, may jump in from time to time. This is something that needed to be done a while back, makes suggesting new fixes less trouble some. I am watching it now, hence I don't get the whole structure and all yet.
My github is sicommnend. ;D
Thank you! :)
I fully agree, it was needed for a while back. We'll get there, to an open development process (and better it, at that), with more of our work, on more projects/subprojects, in time. ;)
Future should be better as planned.
Congrates team for this good roadmap. Let do it. ;)
Quote from: SoLoGHoST on April 02, 2012, 01:22:57 AM
This sounds AWESOME! And I'm glad that you guys are doing this, cause this will promote more advanced modifications, ideas, basically anything would be possible. Sounds great!
Impossible is a curse word...
Xenforo: zend framework
phpbb: symfony
smf: hmmm...
why do you build your kernel when it is ready to use frames?
because when you use the finished frame will be easier to work with other ready-made solutions and find work as volunteers, they will know the specifics of the forum and framework
I await news eagerly. Thank you for your continued development.
Good news here :)
Please make it more SEO friendly... Can we edit tag and description of all the pages/topics? Is it possible to design in such a way that we can transfer the forum from one host to other directly... I mean just few click and download a large file containing all html file and MySql and with another click it would be uploaded to any host ;) or any thing better than this?
Congratulations and Best of Luck
QuoteCan we edit tag and description of all the pages/topics?
So you're going to sit there and write tags (which aren't important any more and haven't been for years) and descriptions for every single topic when your users won't do it themselves?
QuoteIs it possible to design in such a way that we can transfer the forum from one host to other directly...
Not really, no. You could do so for small sites but once you get to any modest size (10k posts or more) this is just not practical.
Looking forward to seeing SMF move from procedural to OOP. I took a Java class back in 2004 and learned how to write classes. It was the best thing ever. So, I have a understanding what this is about. Of course, we're talking about application programming vs website scripting.
Aside from coding changes, I'm looking forward to seeing new actual features to enhance the user experience.
I've been out of the loop, I use to use SMF 1.1 in mid 2007 and never really had an interest in site administration after that. Again, I'm more into application programming, not site scripting.
Is there any sort of vague idea when SMF 3.0 MIGHT be released? Are we looking at anytime in 2012? Yes/No/Maybe? Just curious if anyone knows that much, at least. Regardless, I'll be happy when it does come out.
That's simple - 3.0 won't be released in 2012. Just don't try to get any more specific than that ;)
Quote from: bestfriendavinash on May 08, 2012, 10:32:37 AM
Please make it more SEO friendly... Can we edit tag and description of all the pages/topics?
Meta description has absolutely no effect on search result position. It's useless for SEO purposes. Frankly, it should just get pulled out completely.
Also, I echo Arantor's comments on you sitting down and tagging every single topic. Not hard for a small board with minimal traffic, impossible on a medium board as you'd spend all your time trying to come up with decent tags.
Quote from: bestfriendavinash on May 08, 2012, 10:32:37 AM
Is it possible to design in such a way that we can transfer the forum from one host to other directly... I mean just few click and download a large file containing all html file and MySql and with another click it would be uploaded to any host ;) or any thing better than this?
Not possible without making things
very complicated. Also, it wouldn't scale well at all. As it is, the built-in database-only backup feature of SMF has problems on some hosts and will not work on large forums. Additionally, as each hosting provider is slightly different, you'd have to try to accommodate a lot of variability.
If you don't allow attachments and uploaded avatars on your forum, you can get away with just a plain database backup.
It should have framework for installing extensions like joomla, install mods will not change the code of files or you limited your rang..
Quote from: Tomy Tran on May 11, 2012, 09:19:18 AM
It should have framework for installing extensions like joomla, install mods will not change the code of files or you limited your rang..
You are just echoing what the first topic clearly stated.
QuoteCan we edit tag and description of all the pages/topics?
Meta descriptions are not a bad thing, don't let them get you down about this. Allot of social sites will and do use the meta descriptions for page links. So yes meta descriptions are important to a certain audience, to search engines not so important.
Allot of them also take open graph meta tags, not all of them though. The rest rely on meta descriptions for a link description.
There's still a fundamental problem... unless it's automated using the content itself (i.e. the first post), users aren't generally going to fill something in, meaning that unless it's automated, you won't get anything at all (users don't understand why they would have to fill something like that in, they don't care about your site being well ranked)
You must be talking about the tags. I don't see any problems with meta, just pull the description of the board or the first post of a topic and shorten it to specs. Basically all my SMF sites do this. There shouldn't be any source code edits required though to get this work. In index.template.php, if your in a topic just pull the first post out of the topic array, in a board pull context['description'] to get the board descriptions, in board index well nothing there to hook onto.
Nice, so how's about plan, when we could test on RC and use Stable edition of 3.0?
sigh. The answer is in this thread. I hope the expectation to take a few minutes and read back a few pages isn't too much. If it is, we're talking years. Can't get any more specific.
Quote from: live627 on May 15, 2012, 03:30:41 AM
sigh. The answer is in this thread. I hope the expectation to take a few minutes and read back a few pages isn't too much. If it is, we're talking years. Can't get any more specific.
Plus the pages will still increase ;D
awesome!!!
Quote from: live627 on May 25, 2012, 06:25:55 PM
I'm done reporting. No one gives a ******.
That, and the fact that the whole reporting system just doesn't get peoples' attention enough, another reason why the whole moderation system needs an overhaul.
Well, actually, the problem is that the folks who red the reports are not the folks who delete or ban.... And the few admins who can, don't.... When I had admin, I think I was one of the few who actually did something about the spammers.
Right now, the user is muted, warned or watched so as to keep track, but that's all that the non admins can do.
But surely anyone who can read the report can remove the relevant post and document it in the moderation boards? Or is it now that no-one but admins can delete posts?
Removed the posts :)
System does need slightly better notifications system or display though.
Quote from: Trekkie101 on May 25, 2012, 07:53:05 PM
Removed the posts :)
Thank you. I see mine is gone too, but noo biggie. It verged onto the trolling side.
Quote from: Arantor on May 25, 2012, 07:13:27 PM
But surely anyone who can read the report can remove the relevant post and document it in the moderation boards?
Joker's mod does this. Why not use it?
Think about that for a moment. The mods in use here are because they are things that are not present in SMF (topic solved, helpdesk etc.) but that have distinct use here.
Consider what would happen if it became the situation that the SMF team find the moderation panel so bad even they didn't use it. What message would that send?
Quote from: Kindred on May 25, 2012, 07:11:42 PM
Well, actually, the problem is that the folks who red the reports are not the folks who delete or ban.... And the few admins who can, don't.... When I had admin, I think I was one of the few who actually did something about the spammers.
Right now, the user is muted, warned or watched so as to keep track, but that's all that the non admins can do.
It depends on the spammers but I've found that banning the accounts are generally a waste of time if you don't do it immediately. Most spammer accounts I see come in, spam, and then are never used again.
What would be good is if the team can take a person to the level where their posts require approval.
Quote from: Thantos on May 26, 2012, 09:27:22 AM
Quote from: Kindred on May 25, 2012, 07:11:42 PM
Well, actually, the problem is that the folks who red the reports are not the folks who delete or ban.... And the few admins who can, don't.... When I had admin, I think I was one of the few who actually did something about the spammers.
Right now, the user is muted, warned or watched so as to keep track, but that's all that the non admins can do.
It depends on the spammers but I've found that banning the accounts are generally a waste of time if you don't do it immediately. Most spammer accounts I see come in, spam, and then are never used again.
What would be good is if the team can take a person to the level where their posts require approval.
They can, set the "warning" level to 100% and the person can't post.
Wait may I ask where this discussion is going...?
Quote from: Yoshi2889 on May 26, 2012, 02:10:14 PM
Wait may I ask where this discussion is going...?
Very far to the left of the topic :P
It could be the greatest thing for the group who really had their effort on this project but then expanding will also means a lot of responsibility which I think will lead you onto some technical support to successfully manage everything at you own convenience.
Quote from: Yoshi2889 on May 26, 2012, 02:10:14 PM
Wait may I ask where this discussion is going...?
Spamwards, very quickly.
reCaptcha for plugin in, admin can use on Register, Login or Submit or insert in a post. Oh, I think should be a separate plugin but full feature like that :D
And attach image to insert into post must be improve as well ;)
Well, there's a reCaptcha plugin, and it integrates into the normal CAPTCHA feature (either as well as or in place of) and you can use that quite happily on registration or posts - other than specifically reCAPTCHA, it's all built in.
You can quite happily use the regular CAPTCHA on registration or posting. Doing it on login would actually break on WAP/WAP2/imode which is why registration is also not supported on those platforms.
Why are you posting "feature requests" here? This thread is announcing the formation of the SM Core project... and has nothing to do with features.
Also. recaptcha is useless. Spammers broke that function a long time ago.
Thank you everyone for your replies and the nice good luck wishes! :)
Your support is greatly appreciated and we're happy to see you're all glad to see this project coming to life :)
Due to the amount of spam posts that news topics, including this one, usually attract and the fact that this topics seems to have ran it's course for now judging by the last replies to it, I'm going to lock this topic.
Thank you again for all the support, good to see such a active community!
And don't forget; if you want to learn more about smCore: make sure to check the project website (http://www.smcore.org).
Thanks!