Guys, your 2.0.7 tanked but you have the Mod Site set to not accept 2.0.6 mods

Started by Deprecated, January 21, 2014, 07:34:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Deprecated

I tried to start checking in my updated 2.0.6 mods at the Mod Site but you have no check box for 2.0.6, and you have no code for me to check my mods to see if they work on 2.0.7.

In essence you've made it impossible for me to check in my updated mods unless I take a wild axxed guess that they'll work on 2.0.7.

How about restoring the Mod Site to allow checking in / uploading mods qualified to work with 2.0.6?

Arantor

Can't be done without screwing up a lot more site architecture. There's a single master table on the site that collates all that stuff.

Arantor

So I re-read this when I had the time to respond properly. You are asking us to make a major change to site architecture, in response to an event that hasn't happened before, shouldn't really have happened in the first place, and in all likelihood won't ever happen again just because you can't have 24 hours patience while we fix something that broke?

Sorry if I sound snarky but trying to debug the issues in 2.0.7 is something of a difficult task and people complaining does not make it any easier.

Deprecated

Quote from: Sir Cumber-Patcher on January 21, 2014, 07:37:26 PM
Can't be done without screwing up a lot more site architecture. There's a single master table on the site that collates all that stuff.

Two words. First word is bull. You guess the second. Just roll back the Mod Site to accept SMF 2.0.6 mod packages. I'm getting pretty PO'd, I'm all ready to update all my mod packages and the only option I have is to pretend they are compatible with SMF 2.0.7 but you have no SMF 2.0.7 that I can download and install and test them.

Fine. Is that what you want? Shall I just upload all my mod packages and check 2.0.7 compatible, and then we'll fix it later? Is that what you really want?

Just remember I write code. If I had access to a SMF site admin account I'd just re-enable the 2.0.6 compatible box so that mod authors can upload their works.

Remember that one of the reasons SMF is a popular forum software is because of their wide variety of available mod packages.

What you are doing is turning me off when I am in a creative mood, and I'm the #10 mod package author you have.

Either roll back the Mod Site so that mod package authors can upload their 2.0.6 mod packages, or get with the program and make the 2.0.7 update available.

Meanwhile I work on three projects and I'm about ready to put SMF back on the back burner unless you either enable the Mod Site to upload 2.0.6 mod packages or enable the download site to be able to download SMF 2.0.7.

Please tell me where any part of my request is unreasonable.

Deprecated

Quote from: Sir Cumber-Patcher on January 21, 2014, 10:04:35 PM
So I re-read this when I had the time to respond properly. You are asking us to make a major change to site architecture, in response to an event that hasn't happened before, shouldn't really have happened in the first place, and in all likelihood won't ever happen again just because you can't have 24 hours patience while we fix something that broke?

Major change in site architecture? Just enable the box on the Mod Site that allows SMF 2.0.6 packages to be checked in?

Major change in the site architecture? You gotta be kidding me. It probably takes just one setting on the Mod Site configuration page.

And just to answer your question, yes, I do expect you to do that. You've created a situation where mod package authors cannot check in their updated packages. Just what part of that is reasonable?

Arantor

You're annoyed? How do you think *I* feel exactly?

You have no idea how our site architecture works, so telling me what is or is not BS is unreasonable. Changing that table will have many strange effects, including forcing all kinds of things to be rebuilt. I doubt you noticed, for example, the hour or two of downtime while the servers were unavailable completely because of issues relating to this.

To be honest, go nuts. Most mod authors won't even bother re-testing their mods but just mark the button - if they can even be bothered to do that. History has not shown that they're that interested.

SMF has been in decline for years. Any look at the stats will tell you that. It's not popular because of the mods, it's in decline partly because of them. Because of them not being updated, because of taking 5 years to get to 2.0, because of the fact most mods still need edits.

So what if you're the #10 mod package author? You've been absent for several years, which pretty much neutralises that argument. So your argument becomes trying to blackmail me into spending a lot of time fixing something that should never happen all because you can't have 24 hours patience. I would rather spend my time fixing 2.1 so that everyone benefits instead of pandering to your temper tantrum, because that is all it is.

QuoteEither roll back the Mod Site so that mod package authors can upload their 2.0.6 mod packages, or get with the program and make the 2.0.7 update available.

We already screwed up one update. I'd like to have more people test the revised version so we don't have this problem again, and I had to be elsewhere today because I have commitments to meet when I'm not spending most of my life here.

But I guess little realities like that don't come into play. Because of course pandering to your attitude is more important than visiting my grandmother on her 81st birthday, and not screwing over the systems of people who pay me for my time.

QuoteMeanwhile I work on three projects and I'm about ready to put SMF back on the back burner unless you either enable the Mod Site to upload 2.0.6 mod packages or enable the download site to be able to download SMF 2.0.7.

Since that isn't going to happen, I guess you should put SMF back on the back burner for 24 hours.

QuotePlease tell me where any part of my request is unreasonable.

The part where you think we're going to bow down to you because you think you have leverage to make demands that are technically and practically unreasonable though you have no idea why that might be. The part where you're trying to use guilt trips to make a point. The part where we're trying to prevent a second mistake from happening but you don't care about that.

QuoteMajor change in site architecture? Just enable the box on the Mod Site that allows SMF 2.0.6 packages to be checked in?

Like I have said several times, all the versions of all branches are stored in one table. Changing that table will cause other things to happen. More downtime, on the *hours* territory.

Also, here's a thought... all the time I'm standing here arguing with you about why we're not going to change our architecture to suit your whims (because it is an architectural change, involving tables, systems and servers you know nothing about), is time I'm not spending actually working on the update.

Now please, stop complaining, have a little patience. If you can't wait 24 hours for an answer to something, you should probably leave now, because when you start committing mods, the reviews will take longer than 24 hours to complete.

Deprecated

Quote from: Sir Cumber-Patcher on January 21, 2014, 10:23:20 PM
You're annoyed? How do you think *I* feel exactly?

You have no idea how our site architecture works, so telling me what is or is not BS is unreasonable. Changing that table will have many strange effects, including forcing all kinds of things to be rebuilt. I doubt you noticed, for example, the hour or two of downtime while the servers were unavailable completely because of issues relating to this.

To be honest, go nuts. Most mod authors won't even bother re-testing their mods but just mark the button - if they can even be bothered to do that. History has not shown that they're that interested.

SMF has been in decline for years. Any look at the stats will tell you that. It's not popular because of the mods, it's in decline partly because of them. Because of them not being updated, because of taking 5 years to get to 2.0, because of the fact most mods still need edits.

So what if you're the #10 mod package author? You've been absent for several years, which pretty much neutralises that argument. So your argument becomes trying to blackmail me into spending a lot of time fixing something that should never happen all because you can't have 24 hours patience. I would rather spend my time fixing 2.1 so that everyone benefits instead of pandering to your temper tantrum, because that is all it is.

QuoteEither roll back the Mod Site so that mod package authors can upload their 2.0.6 mod packages, or get with the program and make the 2.0.7 update available.

We already screwed up one update. I'd like to have more people test the revised version so we don't have this problem again, and I had to be elsewhere today because I have commitments to meet when I'm not spending most of my life here.

But I guess little realities like that don't come into play. Because of course pandering to your attitude is more important than visiting my grandmother on her 81st birthday, and not screwing over the systems of people who pay me for my time.

QuoteMeanwhile I work on three projects and I'm about ready to put SMF back on the back burner unless you either enable the Mod Site to upload 2.0.6 mod packages or enable the download site to be able to download SMF 2.0.7.

Since that isn't going to happen, I guess you should put SMF back on the back burner for 24 hours.

QuotePlease tell me where any part of my request is unreasonable.

The part where you think we're going to bow down to you because you think you have leverage to make demands that are technically and practically unreasonable though you have no idea why that might be. The part where you're trying to use guilt trips to make a point. The part where we're trying to prevent a second mistake from happening but you don't care about that.

QuoteMajor change in site architecture? Just enable the box on the Mod Site that allows SMF 2.0.6 packages to be checked in?

Like I have said several times, all the versions of all branches are stored in one table. Changing that table will cause other things to happen. More downtime, on the *hours* territory.

Also, here's a thought... all the time I'm standing here arguing with you about why we're not going to change our architecture to suit your whims (because it is an architectural change, involving tables, systems and servers you know nothing about), is time I'm not spending actually working on the update.

Now please, stop complaining, have a little patience. If you can't wait 24 hours for an answer to something, you should probably leave now, because when you start committing mods, the reviews will take longer than 24 hours to complete.

I quoted you just so you can't change what you said. You should be ashamed of yourself, and you should be ashamed if you are representing SMF to the public.

I'm not submitting mods, I'm updating mods. I don't need anybody's permission for that.

I particularly like the part where you said SMF had been in decline for years. I happen to disagree with that, and I'll be very disappointed if anybody on the developer team felt that way.

If SMF is on the decline then why don't we just shut down the site and all go home?

PhuriousGeorge


Arantor

I'm not ashamed of myself because it's the truth. I'm deeply hurt and embarrassed over what happened here in the last 24 hours (because it was partly my fault for not being nearly thorough enough in testing) and I'm hurting - which is why I feel the way I do and why I deeply resent someone trying to blackmail me into spending a lot of my time because they don't have a bit of patience. 2.0.7 will be up either later tonight or tomorrow pending some more testing. If you really can't wait that long, then your motivation can't actually be that strong.

As for decline, http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=stats says it all. Just look at the yearly totals since 2008. Can't argue with that: decline year on year.

Why don't we just go home? Because some of us are stupid enough to spend many, many hours of our waking lives trying to make something nice (and getting shouted at when it goes wrong). Some of us are gluttons for punishment. I keep getting it, I keep coming back for more.

LiroyvH

Quote
I particularly like the part where you said SMF had been in decline for years. I happen to disagree with that, and I'll be very disappointed if anybody on the developer team felt that way.

Decline of users does not necessarily equal decline in quality of the product. ;) And it does not, here.
SMF is still a awesome product, and our developers are doing their best to make an even more awesome product. (I'm sure many will *love* SMF 2.1)
That doesn't alter the fact though: user numbers declined. This can be seen throughout the entire community forum software market ever since companies like Facebook emerged. It's competition, and we have to battle that just like all the other community software makers. Simple as that.

It's absolutely not a decline in quality of the SMF package. (Can't always say the same for mods though indeed, some are indeed never updated unfortunately...)
((U + C + I)x(10 − S)) / 20xAx1 / (1 − sin(F / 10))
President/CEO of Simple Machines - Server Manager
Please do not PM for support - anything else is usually OK.

Deprecated

Well maybe I'm one of those people who is stupid enough to waste my time on SMF but I have my SMF public and they've been asking me to update my mod packages, so I decided to accomodate them. And even worse, I have some killer mods in the conceptual stage, mods I'm certain I can code (and when I do that of course I'll send them to the Mod Squad for testing). I'm one of the people who wants to make SMF better, not one of the people who thinks it's a sinking ship.

And just remember, my request has NOTHING to do with the pending 2.0.7 release. My only problem is that I can't check in mod packages for 2.0.6. I'll be happy to requalify them for 2.0.7 whenever the developers get around to releasing the new version. All I am asking is to re-enable the 2.0.6 compatible box at the Mod Site.

Maybe you have had bad experiences with mod package authors. I'm not one of them. I test my mod packages with every version I say they're compatible with. I tested them with 2.0.6 but there's no 2.0.6 check box. I'd check them with 2.0.7 but there is no 2.0.7.

I'm not a glutton for punishment. I happen to like writing code. If you are punishing yourself maybe you should get into a different line of work.

Just to repeat so that my point is not mistaken. I am not putting any pressure on the development team to accelerate their work. I respect their substantial contributions to the project. All I am asking is to re-enable the 2.0.6 compatibility box at the Mod Site so I can upload my SMF 2.0.6 qualified mods.

Just what is unreasonable about that? Just enable the 2.0.6 box.

Arantor

No, you're not putting pressure on the development team to accelerate their work. You flat out demanded something to accommodate you and only you, because of your lack of patience, that requires the dev team to deal with. Which is a massive drain on what limited time the dev team DO actually have.

What is unreasonable about it? You haven't been listening to what I've been saying. EVERYTHING on the site is driven from one table. Changes to that table will cause bad things to happen. Heck, even I don't have the power to change that table precisely because bad things will happen if it is changed without consideration - and you want us to change it which will cause all kinds of hell because of the site architecture. THAT's what's unreasonable. To you it's just a single tickbox, to us who actually have to deal with it, it's NOT.

Deprecated

Quote from: CoreISP on January 21, 2014, 10:38:02 PM
Quote
I particularly like the part where you said SMF had been in decline for years. I happen to disagree with that, and I'll be very disappointed if anybody on the developer team felt that way.

Decline of users does not necessarily equal decline in quality of the product.  And it does not, here.
SMF is still a awesome product, and our developers are doing their best to make an even more awesome product. (I'm sure many will *love* SMF 2.1)
That doesn't alter the fact though: user numbers declined. This can be seen throughout the entire community forum software market ever since companies like Facebook emerged. It's competition, and we have to battle that just like all the other community software makers. Simple as that.

It's absolutely not a decline in quality of the SMF package. (Can't always say the same for mods though indeed, some are indeed never updated unfortunately...)

I couldn't agree with you more! Just remember, my job doesn't pay any more than your job. (Okay maybe a few donations here and there.)

I think SMF is better than ever and getting better with every release, getting better with every new mod package, and I'm impressed with the work of both the developers and of my fellow mod package authors. I'm very challenged to keep up with the other modders and I enjoy the game of who can come up with what fantastic new mods for SMF. I have some killer ideas and I need to update my 26 mods so that I can move on to #27-30. I have mods that will overshadow all my mods at present. Unfortunately in my hiatus some of my good ideas have been separately invented by others, but I'm going to release my own versions anyway, and let the SMF public choose what mods are the ones they want to run.

To be bluntly honest I think vBulletin is the best forum software out there. But vBulletin costs big bucks and SMF is free, open source. (Very fitting since my LAMP shared hosting is also open source, Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP, and IMO better than ALL the commercial products!) But SMF is almost as good as vBulletin and it's free! And bad news for vBulletin, their users are very unhappy with recent releases. There is a significant migration to XenForo. (Also big bucks.) And then we have #3, phpBB, but I've never seen them as a contender for the best open source forum software. But I'm biased. I'm sure you know the SMF insides better than me but I know the code pretty well too, and I like it. I wrote my own content delivery system based upon what I learned working on SMF. All my original code, nothing from SMF except I too use the $context[] array, good idea!<$1alt="" title="" onresizestart="return false;" id="smiley__$2" style="padding: 0 3px 0 3px;" />

Anyway, if SMF is declining then I'm not willing to accept that. If it can decline then it can incline too (if that makes sense). The developers do their job, the modders do their job, and let's not forget the theme-ers (awkward word) because they transform SMF from plain default to a work of art.

We all have our jobs, and when we work together if we work hard and if we work clever then I think whatever decline SMF has had can be reversed. As far as I'm concerned anybody who doesn't agree with that should get off the project.

I'm sorry I've been such a nuisance today but I want to write code and due to the present situation I can't do my job. My work is incremental. I update a mod package, I test it, I check it in to the Mod Site, I check it off my punch list and move on to the next mod. But I can't check in to the Mod Site because they only accept 2.0.7 mods, and I can't qualify my mods for 2.0.7 because there isn't any.

Well I've had enough. I've had a bad day. You've had a bad day. Cucumber has probably had a bad day too. Maybe everything will be better tomorrow. I don't envy the developers. My own career was as a professional developer, and I don't envy being under the pressure of getting the code done and no carrot in the form of a big pay check. I'd be more than happy to postpone 2.0.7 until the developers can fix the bugs instead of working long hours.

I just want to get 26 mod packages out of the way so I can work on 27-30. I'm almost certain none of my packages will be affected by 2.0.6 -> 2.0.7. But who knows?

I'm going to answer any more replies to my posts or PMs and then I'm hitting it soon. Maybe I'll wake up tomorrow and 2.0.7 will be all released, or maybe I'll wake up tomorrow and find there's a check box at the Mod Site for 2.0.6 compatibility. Either way is fine with me.

I'm just not satisfied to have a job where it is impossible for me to complete it and it's not possible for me to make any progress. Google "Sisyphus" or I'll save you the trouble: Wikipedia Sisyphus

Deprecated

Quote from: Sir Cumber-Patcher on January 21, 2014, 10:49:51 PM
No, you're not putting pressure on the development team to accelerate their work. You flat out demanded something to accommodate you and only you, because of your lack of patience, that requires the dev team to deal with. Which is a massive drain on what limited time the dev team DO actually have.

I'm not asking anything of the Dev team. My request is directed towards the Customization Team.

And it's not just for myself. None of the mod package authors can check anything in. We wouldn't have anything to mod without the developer team, but just remember what a plain jane package SMF would be without the mods.

Arantor

Except 1) you specifically asked for the Cust team to work with the devs in your request to the Cust team (I help with the Cust team), and 2) the master table in question is controlled by the Dev team anyway because multiple parts of the site (downloads, download languages, all the different parts of the cust site) all use that one table, like I've been saying the whole way along.

So even if the Cust team were willing, it'd STILL need the dev team's input and both dev and site team are against it; we have discussed this internally. If it were going to be more than 24 hours to get the site upgrade back up, fair point, we'd look at doing it. But it's not. It's going to be later on today that it gets dealt with when all the packages will be back up, and then you can test to your heart's content. Like I've been saying, this is only a temporary issue - on a scale of hours, not days. Why should we change anything serious for a 24 hour delay?

Honestly, though, if you bothered by one day, don't bother submitting any more mods because I guarantee it will take more than 24 hours for each mod to be reviewed. Even when it's a short mod. I've just submitted two of my old mods to the site, curious to see how long it'll take to get them approved (because I don't approve my own wherever possible)

QuoteI'm sorry I've been such a nuisance today but I want to write code and due to the present situation I can't do my job. My work is incremental. I update a mod package, I test it, I check it in to the Mod Site, I check it off my punch list and move on to the next mod. But I can't check in to the Mod Site because they only accept 2.0.7 mods, and I can't qualify my mods for 2.0.7 because there isn't any.

Nuisance? No, you've been downright offensive, actually.

sangham.net

* Johann too, doesn't like it when Mommy and Daddy fight. Please be patient with each others. Step down for a while.

Quote from: PhuriousGeorge on January 21, 2014, 10:33:33 PM
* PhuriousGeorge doesn't like it when Mommy and Daddy fight.


青山 素子

Compromise suggestion...

I'm not familiar with the customization site side, but is it possible to manually mark compatibility without disturbing the site stability? Say, for example, Deprecated uploads updates for all the modifications that have been verified as 2.0.6 compatible. Would it be possible to submit a list of the modification IDs and have them be manually marked as 2.0.6 compatible? How long would that take?

I can only think that there must be some other table in place for storing that info since the old compatibility listings still show.
Motoko-chan
Director, Simple Machines

Note: Unless otherwise stated, my posts are not representative of any official position or opinion of Simple Machines.


Arantor

Technically, yes, that's doable. It's even possible for him to manually add the relevant <input type="checkbox"> into the page to list 2.0.6 compatibility if he really wanted. (I've been known to do that on special occasions)

But since we're literally right now in the process of getting the 2.0.7 files back online it's all somewhat moot.

Deprecated

First of all, it's not an issue today, at least not for me. The time has passed that it's worth discussing. I'm not going to spend any more energy arguing about it.

And Arantor, you appear to not understand that I am not submitting mod packages. I am updating mod packages, and mod package updates do not need any interaction with or approval from the Mod Team.

I didn't know there was any way to add the 2.0.6 checkbox back. That's all I was requesting in the first place. I'll go give it a try.

And BTW, once I've submitted a mod package for review I don't care how long it takes to be approved. Your first several or dozen mod packages, you hang on worrying about when they'll be done. You get past that stage and then once you submit a new mod you just move on to the next mod. Besides, it's human nature that if you push somebody to do something sooner I guarantee they're going to do it later, just out of spite.

Arantor

And if you had just had a little bit of patience like I'd asked for in the first place, you'd find that 2.0.7 should now be available again. Like I said it would be. But the truth is irrelevant if you don't agree with it.

As for the patience issue, I was referring to your 'I'm going to publish new mods' stuff. Since I was actually reading what you were posting even if I didn't agree with it.

But we're done now and this can probably be locked like the other complaints about how bad and terrible we are.

Deprecated

Well I'm going to have to write some new mods before I can submit some new mods. And I'm not writing any new mods until all the relevant old mods are up to 2.0.7 compatibility.

Arantor

That's up to you. Point still stands: if you haven't got 24 hours' patience, submitting mods will be an ordeal for you.

Kindred

Deprecated,

I appreciate your mods (I even use a few)
I appreciate your desire to get mods updated.

I don't appreciate the attacks on the team members.
I don't appreciate MULTIPLE TOPICS stating th same thing over and over, in multiple boards.
I don't appreciate your impatience when we clearly stated that we were fixing the issues and the release would be re-done shortly. (which solved your issue without any further action)

Get over it.
it was a 24 hour blink.
And Arantor is completely correct...  once the update is released, it is more than a minor bit of work to roll anything back on the other parts of the site... You don't know how this site is stapled together or configured - so for you to say "simply do this" is ingenuous at best.

Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Deprecated

Just for you Kindred, I hereby tender my apology to all the staff.

And Arantor, you are not reading my posts. I'll just summarize it for you. Once I submit a mod package to the Mod Team I could care less how long they take to approve it. The longer they take the better job they will do checking it, and the better they check it the less likely it will be to cause problems for users.

So look, 2.0.7 is on the download site again. There's nothing further to discuss.

The End

Advertisement: