Once SMF is considerred fully stable I'll begin work on two SMF for XOOPS 1.3.x and XOOPS 2.x modules.
For now I have YaBB TDfX (http://test.msnug.com/xoops/modules/yabb/) that is built off of YaBB SE 1.5.4 in beta phase. There's a few little tweaks that need to be done yet but for the most part the membership ports over.
For those interested in staying up-to-date with the current developement of YaBB TDfX I recommend visiting http://dev.tywick.com and/or http://test.msnug.com/xoops/
I would love this, since SMF is awesome, and XOOPS is a great web portal.
The combination leaves you with an unbeatable website, am I right or am I right? ???
Interesting idea. Funny to see how quickly xoops has gained in poularity. Last time I went there the site looked like a hacked up phpnuke. :P
"hacked up phpnuke"
That was my evaluation after looking at it too.
Quote from: Shoeb Omar on August 15, 2003, 11:42:14 PM
Interesting idea. Funny to see how quickly xoops has gained in poularity. Last time I went there the site looked like a hacked up phpnuke. :P
If I'm not mistaken, it is I think.. it used to be a myphpnuke copy I thought.
from modules/system/admin.php
// ------------------------------------------------------------------------- //
// XOOPS - PHP Content Management System //
// <http://www.xoops.org/> //
// ------------------------------------------------------------------------- //
// Based on: //
// myPHPNUKE Web Portal System - http://myphpnuke.com/ //
// PHP-NUKE Web Portal System - http://phpnuke.org/ //
// Thatware - http://thatware.org/ //
// ------------------------------------------------------------------------- //
so yes XOOPS is a hacked up myphpNuke/phpNuke.
XOOPS v 2 has "evolved" (over-complicated) quite a bit from 1.3.x.
I intend to provide SMF modules for both versions.
Mmmm...... In searching on "xoops" I see that I likened Xoops to a hacked up PHPnuke last August.
I have to say that soon after that I actually used Xoops to create a site and I love it. Xoops has evolved into a very elegant portal system that allows you to create a powerful site in a very short amount of time. Take a look at www.bloggerforum.com for an example.
I have another site that relies on YabbSE and I keep wanting to convert it to a Xoops site. However, I like Yabb so much I would hate to lose it for the NewBB forum platform that comes stock with Xoops. Being able to integrate the two (or, as it now turns out, SM) would be ideal.
for me xoops is better than phpnuke. much more easy to use. cool if they insert this new forum to their.
Man... after checking out a few xoops powered sites, i gotta say...
I can't wait for a SMF module for xoops to be released!!
It really does look nice... and I think I will end up using it rather than my originally planned mambo cms for my site.
Looking forward to this release very much :)
I'd like an SMF module for XOOPS because even though I can't theme SMF, I CAN theme XOOPS.
http://dev.tywick.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=21&forum=6
Quotebegin work on 1.0 simplemachines bbs
best is begin work on new public vertion of YABBSE New website www.simplemachines.org vertion 1.0
I hope your dev team will look into it
sol812
Well I guess the pressure is on to start work now.
I'll see what I can do and if I'll have better luck with SMF for X2 than I have for YaBB
Yeah theres a bunch of Nuke-like content Mangagement software out there.....
I didn't fand any that really met me needs, I more or less needed a quick site development sofware...
I found phpWebSite. Its a bit less invloved compaired to nuke/post nuke, but it better fit my needs..
Check it out
http://phpwebsite.appstate.edu/
Quote from: rickc on March 24, 2004, 05:54:53 PM
Yeah theres a bunch of Nuke-like content Mangagement software out there.....
I didn't fand any that really met me needs, I more or less needed a quick site development sofware...
I found phpWebSite. Its a bit less invloved compaired to nuke/post nuke, but it better fit my needs..
Check it out
http://phpwebsite.appstate.edu/
What does phpWebSite have to do with this thread?
Could a moderator split this please?
Very interesting. So its impossible to start right now? :P
I'd prefer to wait until a stable release but it seems many people are anxious for an SMF XOOPS module. But it would take a couble months before I would be able to release. It would probably be less than a month if I actually made a living wage off it.
Whats a Porla and whats
XOOPS
???
Alittle research won't hurt you, homie.
http://www.xoops.org/modules/news/
www.myxoops.org
http://exoops.de/modules/news/
http://www.e-xoops.com/
i prefer exoops but both are good intentions
Sorry to bring this back to life but I'm wondering about the Xoops 'modulification' of SMF.
SMF is THE forum software but Xoops is an excellent portal. I've tried MANY and my share of Nuke flavors. Xoops has evolved so much since I last looked at it that it's now my main portal. BUT, Xoops has a piss-poor forum hack of an old old phpbb forum version. There are a couple of other hacks available to run other forums but I want my SMF ;)
What version of XOOPS are you using right now?
Currently I'm still waiting for a solid Release Candidate of SMF and also confirmation regarding the SMF license before I start any module work on SMF for XOOPS. If you're using X 1.3 then I recommend you move over to Sphinx (http://sphinx-cms.com) when it becomes available. It's based off of X 1.3 but I've been adding better functionality to the core and of course I plan on making SMF work well with it. Currently the YaBB module is working pretty good with it.
Xoops 2.x on my site..
- I've looked at that spinx site but it's really plain looking so I haven't looked into it further. I need a LOT of functionality on my site as you can see:
http://www.aviary.info
The users notice when something comes up missing and right now they're about to burn my house down if I don't get some better forum software than that newbb crap Xoops comes with. Well the newbb version that's currently available anyway.
I really want SMF on my site but it doesn't look like that's going to happen any time soon.
My portal tastes have been evolving over the year and I now am convinced that Xoops is #1.
Tywick, now the pressure is really, really on. I just got my e-mail from SMF telling me that SMF 1.0 Final is out, plus Xoops 2.0.9.1 was JUST released too.
NewBB2 is good, SMF is better.
I don't code but if someone is working on making an XOOPS/SMF integration a reality I'd like to get involved somehow. I have some QA experience in an un-related field, and have a user base that would probably be cooperative with any testing efforts that I threw at them.
i don't know about you guys, but 1.0.1 is working quite stable for me.
If anyone makes a mod or something, i'd be glad to test it!
I have used XOOPS and E-Xoops (now RunCMS), and noticed these systems run slowly when they get larger. Perhaps it was mah host and needed a dedicated host?
Oh well, the site has been gone for ages now, and am looking for a CMS that will integrate with these forums. :)
Quote from: albn on February 14, 2005, 05:14:01 PM
I have used XOOPS and E-Xoops (now RunCMS), and noticed these systems run slowly when they get larger. Perhaps it was mah host and needed a dedicated host?
Oh well, the site has been gone for ages now, and am looking for a CMS that will integrate with these forums. :)
Some explains, e-xoops and runcms, even and eX v2(www.exoops.de) are the same one thing, fork of XOOPS. RunCMS and e-xoops are one thing, both of them still exist, but no maintenance releases from their authors.
to Tywick:
What means stable version of SMF, is 1.0.2 not stable enough, XOOPS 2.0.9.2 with Protector 2.35 is the most stable of all CMS (GPLed, I allready tryd all of them). Or for you SMF 2.0.0SPx.x will be stable and XOOPS 3.0 ? I'm wondering what for you means stable ?
Kernel 2.6.11 is it stable enough ? and why not 2.4.22, or 2.0.38 ? There is no stable releases in the free software, everyone project few seconds after been released becomes unstable, cos someone tester, user or hacker have found a hole in the source, or in the deps libs, like PHP, MySQL, APache, there is no stable, for stable releases go to microsoft.com 8)
I see that this thread is over a year old.
In that time, has any programmer yet been found who can, and is willing, to make an integration bridge for XOOPs and SMF?
Very interested,
-Lion
Hi guys and gals,
i'm also a big fan of SMF and Xoops and have enquired here about "bridgeing" xoops to smf or vice versa and have got some good tips with how to do it but ive also recently been tracking a post on the xoops.org site
http://www.xoops.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=36045&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=0
and to be honest some aspects of the post i felt quite insultive towards SMF :/ im a fan of xoops but i get the impression that they are really "force'ing" there newbb release ( or should i say urgeing ? ) upon there users
now personally i do wish to use xoops but since my discovery of SMF some time ago i cant have a site with forums .. without SMF :)
is there anyone with an inkering of how long this will take or the ball gets rolling etc .. as i feel xoops team share no interest in developing further upon this, just my opinion ofcourse :)
To be frank, Mithrandir's posts there expose that he is not such a hot shot as he seems to believe:
QuoteThere is no API (ways to plug into the code - like an engine's valves where pipes can be connected)
Not entirely true, and that hasn't stopped Mambo, has it?
Quotethere is no database abstraction layer
1. Why do they have to use XOOPS database abstraction layer?
2. Even if it used a class-based abstraction layer, it would still possibly need recoding if it used a DIFFERENT class (e.g. with different methods.)
3. Again, hasn't stopped Mambo.
Quoteall output is generated from scratch
Wrong.
Quoteand it uses a lot of eval() calls
Wrong. And vBulletin uses a billion times as many.
Also note that eval() is more efficient that include() - not less, as he seems to believe - except on servers which have an accelerator installed. You'll note that "eval(" appears in the SMF source code exactly two times (one in the upgrader.) This is his definition of a lot? And, the one time can be disabled (if you have an accelerator, you want this) - and is disabled here.
Quotebut I can't really go much further from there. I have no idea why it won't parse the {$boardurl} etc.
I sincerely hope he is not trying to interpolate a variable inside single quotes. He probably isn't, but he's very vague here.
Quotethe API is non-existing
Silly me, I didn't realize that smf_api.php and SSI.php didn't exist. Mind must be playing tricks on me.
If it took him two hours to come to such conclusions, he's clearly not at all interested in the bridging of SMF and XOOPS. I'm not even interested in worrying about it, in that case - waste of my time as much as his.
Anyway, 1.1 enhances integration markedly, but it's still not going to be enough to get past people not willing to bother to actually care.
As for our, or at least my, position on this, it is simple:
There are a lot of people out there that can write a bit of PHP. Many even, that can write it quite well - it is not as rare a talent as some try to make it out to be. If enough people want XOOPS integration, one of those people will be someone who can write PHP quite well and the integration will be born. I have other things to do, myself, which are frankly more important than trying to work with a snobbish know-it-all making false assumptions. I've written in the integration enhancements to 1.1, and that's my part - Mambo was done by a third party, and there's no reason one of the developers on this team has to be the person to do it for XOOPS.
This is a UNIX-familiar philosophy, and not an uncommon one. I want to concentrate on the forum software, and let other people concentrate on their things. It's part of what open source is about.
-[Unknown]
Hi ya [Unknown]
well as you said learning a code such as PHP isn't hard, but being good at it is not exactly easy the likes of yourself here @ SMF ( as well as the other's who do put in a tremendous amount of work ) and the likes of Mithrandir @ Xoops.org, you guys are the "in the know people"
i guess what I'm trying to say is, many people take your word as final here, where as on xoops they take Mithrandir's words similar to your own over there...
Which in turn does no help for promotion of a bridge .. my original en query :P
i still do feel they had no right to discuss SMF publically in the way they did without what seems to be really installing it just a download and review nothing much in respect of inspection really done, but :( i can imagine it may put many xoops developers away from SMF ... generally these are the people ( obviously not always ) who release the dynamic functions, the intergrations and other such the standard user comes to reply on.
In saying that i can answear my own comments here by saying " well get your ass in gear make no excuses and learn to code " so there you go
anyhoot now that i have dribbled on for the last hmm 5 Min's or so, back to my original question, is this now a closed attempt or are there still some hopes of seeing this intergration/bridge develop further ?
p.s
none of the above was a "pop" or "go" at yourself [Unknown] i think your response was quite justified considering my xoops team "big ups" for a lack of a better word are quite low
O.K, After reviewing [UnKnown]'s post above, Saying anyone is able to do this. I figured i would at least research it in depth, my findings have lead me to only two seemingly worth while starting points.
1. Learn PHP from scratch, study SMF code and learn to plug it from scratch
This is great, but hey i work like most others and my site is my Passion/hobby - so this option is great... when i have time
2. Study whats available and learn what i need to learn as i go, obvious starting points, look at mambo bridge and the YaBB TDfX 2 bridges/plugins(?) and see how they work.
So after taking both on board i went for option 2, So now studying them both, i now find i need to study xoops too ( which was somehow a point i missed out ARGH! ) and now find myself "chasing my tail"
So my question is, how much diffrent is Yabb from SMF ? is it worth be looking at this factor or again will i be kicking myself in the ass trying to figure this out ( trying this stuff also has taught me that being a developper must REALLY do your heads in at times ! )
i also have been looking at how IPB/phpBB have been intergrated/bridged in there too.
The one thing that becomes very noticeable is that the ACP basically is best left not intergrated to an extent (?)
Also that the registration process is best coded into one system rather than trying to support both (?) i.e register via the xoops or SMF system not be able to use both.
Also theme templates are best left to there respected systems id assume, obviously it would be nice to include themeing to support both in one system but i guess this would cause more problems that it would actually fix (?)
also one thing i see come up a lot during my research is session usage, seems this is best intergrated to be similar or use one system for the session management (?)
and the last point that seems to be raised a lot is .. core changed, xoops are totally against core changes, as upgrades become hard to track ( although i do prefer when projects publish manual changes to be made where possible ( phpBB do this ) ... personal preference really.. ), I also get the impression although not quite "shunned upon" as much by the SMF team but the same principles apply, try avoid core changes as much as possible ! ..
sorry lots of questions with not a lot of input ... but if i got to get somewhere i need to know where I'm going first :D
XCeption,
As [Unknown] said 1.1 will make integration *much* easier from SMF's point of view, but it should be relatively easy to add the *basics* of an integration - but only if one or the other system is starting from scratch (Otherwise you'll have a hard time using one set of members)
Personally, for an integration I'd disable registration from SMF, and meerly modify XOOPS to put an entry into the SMF members table as well as the XOOPS members table. (Sharing the same user_id). And just keep them sync'ed up for password changes and the like. You may also want to modify the login/logout routines of SMF to look for the XOOPS cookie and use that if it exists.
The alternative approach is to keep "syncing" the database. By this I mean when someone logs in to SMF, check their username and password (As per normal). If an entry doesn't exist then look at the XOOPS member table - and if it exists their copy it into the SMF member table. Same for passwords... if an entry exists in SMF but the password doesn't match, check the XOOPS table to see if the password has changed - if so update SMF with the new password.
Obviously there is more "gloss" around this with deleting members, changing passwords from SMF etc - but it's a start.
Grudge
Much discussion has been brewing regarding a bridge between these two great products at Xoops.org:
http://www.xoops.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=36045&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=0
I am happy to announce that through a request by a member named "Pod" at BBpixel.com, "Koudanshi" has agreed to develop a bridge:
http://forum.bbpixel.com/index.php?showtopic=2086
I make a call here to all SMF members and staff who have been interested in this bridge to go to bbpixel.com and donate monetarily to this project. It also may be beneficial for the SMF core team here to contact Koudanshi and co-operate in any way that he may need.
Koudishani has developed some wonderful bridges for both Mambo and Xoops, most notably the IPB/Xoops bridge now in wide use among Xoops users.
Great news for both the Xoops and SMF communities. Hopefully after this both these core teams can work together more closely in making these two products more compatible.
To be correct, Koudanshi's works aren't bridges but integrations.
He used to make a single userbase - and similar things - and then let you choose what you want to use with an option.
EG: With X-IPBM you can use the XOOPS registration system and the IPB profile's system or viceversa; You can choose to wrap xoops header and footer (and relative's blocks) or not when users are browsing the forums.
banned,
Is there any more talk on this integration? I've been following the thread at http://forum.bbpixel.com/index.php?showtopic=2086, but the posts just stopped on 6/3. Any new information on this?
QuotePersonally, for an integration I'd disable registration from SMF, and meerly modify XOOPS to put an entry into the SMF members table as well as the XOOPS members table. (Sharing the same user_id). And just keep them sync'ed up for password changes and the like. You may also want to modify the login/logout routines of SMF to look for the XOOPS cookie and use that if it exists.
I'd have to take a look at Xoops' registration process, but I know with Mambo, I prefer to do it the other way. SMF's registration is more secure and less prone to problems.
if so then the communty bout xoops had to work around it i gues
if smf had to work smootley to it they could do it in no time for ya
just ask them for a bridge a like ;)
I think Koudanshi is waiting for the 2 major releases (SMF 1.1 and XOOPS 2.2) before start a full time work on this :P
My web host just began offering XOOPS as an "easyapp." I'd never heard of it before, but the buzz has all been on the good side. I'm especially interested in the "light" aspect. I have installed several Postnuke sites, and there seems to be many aspects that I don't need but are all part of the core. I'm going to have to fiddle with XOOPS and see if I can get a handle on it. I dislike the thought of having to wait for the next full releases, though. I understand, but I'm impatient, dang it!
*realizes people are looking at her with worried expressions and starts backing away*
Koudanshi is seriously good at what he does. I know from what I was reading in his forums that he was waiting for permission from an SMF dev to start working on the integration. I hope he gets (got) it. This would be the ultimate combination of cms and forum. I think it would be great because you could basicly leave SMF alone and use xoops mods for things like downloads, links etc.. For what it's worth if Koudanshi says he'll do the work then there is little doubt that he will.
My apologies to everyone interested in Sphinx, XOOPS1.3/2, Run CMS (eXOOPS) versions of SMF. I've had a lot of real life issues that have greatly inhibited my ability to work on an SMF module. My wife and I are in a much better position now and I may start on an SMF module in the next couple of weeks.
Quote from: Tywick on August 09, 2005, 11:40:23 AM
My apologies to everyone interested in Sphinx, XOOPS1.3/2, Run CMS (eXOOPS) versions of SMF. I've had a lot of real life issues that have greatly inhibited my ability to work on an SMF module. My wife and I are in a much better position now and I may start on an SMF module in the next couple of weeks.
OMG! :o :o this is a great news! Check out this one (http://allcrews.mielus.ro/) and you'll know why I'm so excited :D
Xoops 2.2.1 running SMF 1.1?
It looks that way, but actually is does not appear that SMF is running as a module. Separate login, not in a modules directory, not searchable from Xoops, etc.
Quote from: Tywick on August 09, 2005, 11:40:23 AM
My apologies to everyone interested in Sphinx, XOOPS1.3/2, Run CMS (eXOOPS) versions of SMF. I've had a lot of real life issues that have greatly inhibited my ability to work on an SMF module. My wife and I are in a much better position now and I may start on an SMF module in the next couple of weeks.
excelent!! please, we are waiting
I just want to say that I support also a xoops / smf module full integration.
I've migrated to xoops recently but I have problem about my smf forum (4000 members) wich I can't integrate in my xoops.
Searching about this point on many forums I can say that this module interest lots of people analysing (like me) ;) that xoops and smf are almost the best in their categoy.
So thanks to go on in the result !
sorry for my english.
Where I can download SMF Module for Xoops ?
Hiyas... I've been using XOOPS for a long time now, and I love it... I also have always loved using SMF, but haven't been able to integrate it into XOOPS, so my main site ( www.richardsdomain.com ) has just got NewBB as it's forum, it's ok for a small forum, but of course SMF beats it hands down. XOOPS is a very good CMS and allows you to create a great website with tons of features and modifying isn't too hard at times. Having both XOOPS and SMF would be great once I can get a few things working with the bridge.
I also Make Themes for XOOPS and I have done some Theme work in SMF a cpl yrs back, so once I can figure out how to make the XOOPS to SMF bridge work so that when users login with the SMF bridge login module SMF recognises current XOOPS users, i'll be able to release Themes which people can use for both SMF and XOOPS so they match.
Has anyone been able to make SMF recognise current XOOPS users on their site? I got the bridge working on another XOOPS site of mine but logging in with a current test account, the SMF didn't recognise it.
Would putting the SMF onto the same Database as XOOPS (using different prefixes) make the bridge recognise current users? lol