Simple Machines Community Forum

Simple Machines Blogs => Developers' Blog => Topic started by: Norv on February 24, 2012, 07:49:09 AM

Title: The future of SMF
Post by: Norv on February 24, 2012, 07:49:09 AM
Hey all,

There are questions in the boards and everywhere about the future of SMF after the long-awaited 2.0 milestone. Some of you remember or have an idea about how long it took from start to finish, and the difficulties we had along the way. Enough of that, though, we have moved forward and we have taken the road towards a true Open Source project, as many have been waiting for. Lets take a look at the present and future.

The community, for years, has been asking about SMF having more features - those of a blog, a gallery, a CMS, and a dozen other things that don't quite fit with all forums. It's been the position of the SMF project that SMF is a forum first and foremost, and that it has to remain simple, with little to no bloat. Are these two desires polar opposites, or is there a solution to bring the two views in accord?

There is a solution. A simple one, and it's time to let you know where we're going.

Long-Term Goals

Last year, I presented the roadmap for future development (post-2.0) to the SMF project team. While the short-term goal was obviously to release 2.0 Gold, the medium- and long-term goals were also discussed. To enumerate a few of the essential goals:

How will we go about accomplishing these goals?

The best way to go, for extensibility and reliability, as well as a years-old wish of the SMF project, is to design SMF in two parts: a core platform, and a forum module plugged into it.
The first part is what we have for a while called "smCore". smCore is designed as a core framework with essential components to serve a wider range of web applications, not only a forum. It comprises functions like user authentication, logging, administration, and a few others - provided in a simple interface for the forum to use (replacing SMF's own generic components with the centralized version). SMF 3.0 is intended as the first module for this core, using its functions. Over time, there may be others - a blog, a CMS, a wiki, a gallery, and so on. The work we do on smCore will benefit each of these things, as well as any top-level modules the community wants to make as well.

What does this all mean?

Simply, this means that SMF will have its inner workings completely rewritten. It doesn't mean there will be two packages for installation, the installer can be smart enough to download the module(s) of your choice to your server. To most users, it simply means that the code and the architecture are different under the hood, and nothing more. SMF itself definitely needs a rewrite of its codebase, to be more in line with PHP's best practices and programming patterns. The "core" part is designed to be extensible from the start, so you can easily add to it with modules and plugins in place of direct code modification.

What does this mean for the next versions of SMF?

Accomplishing these goals means a rebuild of the current codebase, to become the platform we've always wanted.

smCore Project History and Inheritance

The name "smCore" has been tossed around as far back as last year's SMF development roadmaps, but it's really nothing new. It embodies a years-old desire of SMF developers, from 2005 and earlier, to create a product which is a true platform for development of SMF and first-level modules such as a blog, CMS, gallery, and other things which must currently must be hacked onto the forum and live as second-class citizens on your website. Moreover (development-wise) the initiative of a number of SMF friends, former SMF developers and interested contributors alike, from [Unknown] to a number of developers on other open source applications, to start a "core" project last year, went in a similar direction (though not identical) with what we're talking about here. Some of you may remember the unbelievable spark of ideas and brainstorming that went into envisioning a usable and reusable core for multiple web applications - including a forum - that those taking part aimed to create. Their initiative happened along with, and was perhaps in a was fed by, the same issues in the project that led to the restructure of Simple Machines throughout the last year. Purely from a development point of view, the immense brainstorming that happened there has been, IMHO, a wonderful experience and valuable source of ideas and analysis, choices and trade-offs, that smCore and SMF 3.0 will benefit from.

To put it simply, for SMF itself, we know that the way to go in the future is definitely along the lines of rewriting SMF on top of an easily extensible core platform. Other modules will be built on top of this core, not on top of the forum as they would currently be.

Where we are today

From my perspective, it's time to start bringing these plans to fruition. Some of the prerequisite steps have been completed, from the long-awaited Open Source release of SMF 2.0 and the finalization of the umbrella organization, to a number of other steps aiming to truly open this project to its community.

The smCore project will be developed separately from SMF itself, as a sibling project under the Simple Machines organization umbrella. It already has a team of initial Developers (Norv (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=profile;u=211029), Fustrate (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=profile;u=108127), and Joshua Dickerson (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=profile;u=23)) and Core Contributors (AngelinaBelle (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=profile;u=195975) and Joey Smith (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=profile;u=155269)), and the project has already joined Simple Machines.

smCore will have open development, comprised of the following:

On another note, with the changes to a non-profit umbrella organization, Simple Machines' goal is to host multiple projects and make them available to the community. In time, we aim to develop, under this umbrella organization, a "family" of projects such as smCore, SMF, a help desk system, and many more.

Where we are today, development-wise

For SMF 2.1, we have added enhancements and made fixes to the 2.0 codebase, such as:
And others, of course, which we will document in an upcoming blog post. We know that our users, whether admins or translators or customizers from the community need a number of improvements to their 2.0 forums, and we're working on bringing them to you. Watch these blogs and announcements, we will post more as we're getting closer to beta stage on this version!

Work on SMF 3.0 is basically starting when smCore is ready to accept modules, and then, it is being written as a module for smCore. It will be mostly rewritten and partly ported from SMF 2.1 code on a case by case basis, and only in very carefully chosen situations. Porting code is not the same as directly reusing - there is little possible reuse, because of the difference in programming paradigms and design principles between SMF as we know it (and which will remain procedural in 2.1) and SMF of the future.

In the upcoming few weeks, we will have more news about the changes we're making to bring development closer to the community, ease contributions in various areas, enhance official tools and mods and themes areas, ease availability of highly requested tools, and many others. SMF needs you - all of you - whether to give us your proposals, your feedback, your needs, your help, your disagreement - because at the end of the day, we're not building SMF just for us, but for you.

Finally, there's smCore. We have started the project, done a lot of brainstorming, and laid out a roadmap for what we want to achieve. Some code has been written, rewritten, and written yet again, as we figure out which paths we want to take. We've opted to go with a light MVCS (Model/View/Controller/Storage) pattern rather than a strict and heavy traditional MVC pattern (such as the one Zend Framework uses) so that modules are easy to get up and running with minimal setup and code required. Our main focus with smCore is to have a platform that helps module developers create powerful modules quickly. It's an ambitious project, designed from the ground up to be the best and most simple development platform available. We like the direction we're moving in, and we know you will too.

You should look forward to more frequent updates, by the way. This board has gone unnoticed for far too long!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: floridaflatlander on February 24, 2012, 08:03:36 AM
 :) sounds great
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Robert. on February 24, 2012, 08:24:10 AM
Great news Norv! :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OnzeDanny on February 24, 2012, 09:07:41 AM
This is very good & clearly defined news ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: geek_andy on February 24, 2012, 09:38:00 AM
I can't wait

*Starts the time-machine*
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: SSimple Team on February 24, 2012, 04:30:00 PM
Great news!!!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: DeathSign on February 24, 2012, 07:50:07 PM
Awesome that was the things I'd like to see for SMF 3.0 too as long as you can keep it elegant, effective and powerful ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Fustrate on February 24, 2012, 08:39:12 PM
That's certainly our plan :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: InfoStrides on February 26, 2012, 04:11:11 PM
SMF future looks great! Well-done to you all.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Eudemon on March 08, 2012, 11:04:06 AM
I used to not care about the future, then I took an arrow in the knee
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on March 19, 2012, 04:34:19 AM
Code cleaning! Yes! I had several problems with that nasty code. And i really hope that SMF 3.0 will be a completely revolution.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Daniel15 on March 22, 2012, 10:07:09 PM
Quote
We've opted to go with a light MVCS (Model/View/Controller/Storage) pattern
Did you invent this term? I've never heard of it before :P
Is it like HMVC or MVP at all?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Fustrate on March 22, 2012, 10:20:33 PM
Ya, it's kind of invented... it's basically MVC, but instead of littering the model or controller with queries, all of the queries are in "storages". If you want to alter how users are fetched, you only have to modify it in one place.

Pseudo-code:
Code: [Select]
$storage = $this->getStorage('posts');

// Naughty me, hard-coding my ID :P
$postsByMe = $storage->getByUser(108127);

Maybe there's already a term for it, I'm not big into formality like that. Blame MVCS on Norv :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Sudhakar Arjunan on April 13, 2012, 06:06:01 PM
Lets hope for the best.

All the best team.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: karlbenson on April 14, 2012, 03:10:48 PM
Look forward to the developments.  I'll be keeping my eye out.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: martin.claro on May 04, 2012, 05:44:05 PM
SMF team,

When would you release SMF 2.1?.

It would be great to support IPv6 natively (without any mod) for post tracking and ban before the "World IPv6 Launch" on June 6th, 2012.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on May 04, 2012, 05:48:24 PM
Considering that 2.1 isn't even in beta, it would be very poor for SMF to release 2.1 inside the next month.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on May 04, 2012, 06:53:30 PM
http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=3051

That will get SMF 2.0.x to recognise IPv6
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: martin.claro on May 06, 2012, 01:30:27 PM
http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=3051

That will get SMF 2.0.x to recognise IPv6

I know that mod... that's why I asked about "to support IPv6 natively (without any mod)".
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on May 06, 2012, 02:05:43 PM
It won't happen any time soon. SMF 2.1 isn't even in public beta and for it to go through public beta and then to final release inside a month is just screaming 'inadequate testing'.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on May 06, 2012, 05:51:56 PM
It wont be for sure before the 6th of June...well...maybe a beta...or an alpha... :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on May 07, 2012, 12:25:13 AM
/me can see that coming back to bite... hard.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on May 07, 2012, 04:16:13 AM
/me runs very fast...oh no wait I don't run at all!!!!

/me goes to the shop and buys a gun.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: john256 on May 08, 2012, 03:08:08 PM
looks great! Well done.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: martin.claro on May 08, 2012, 10:01:25 PM
Thank you guys for your responses!

I'll be keep an eye on this.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: etstravel on May 21, 2012, 06:53:34 AM
The future of SMF is very nice.It is my future plan.Thanks for sharing this information.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kachan64 on June 05, 2012, 08:33:28 AM
That sounds really good. Just hope that the speed improvements and the way how we edit our codes...  :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: TechTitan on June 06, 2012, 02:36:42 AM
Lightweight on resources...that is something i would like SMF3.0 to have...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on June 06, 2012, 02:42:14 AM
Lightweight on resources...that is something i would like SMF3.0 to have...
SMF2 is already quite light :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Allstar12345 on June 12, 2012, 04:30:40 AM
Any news on SMF 2.1 release  ?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on June 12, 2012, 04:36:14 AM
It's in alpha. That means WIP and not stable enough for a live site yet. Should be moving to early beta in roundabout a month (I think), but don't quote me on that because I'm not the official dude.

Early beta still means that you don't run it on a live site unless you know what you're doing. Getting a stable release wont happen in a month. No, you can't expect an exact date at this stage. That's just not realistic. Sorry.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on June 12, 2012, 04:43:53 AM
Any news on SMF 2.1 release  ?
Still...let's say 3 major things (one of them it's Ant's fault :P and that's a hint) we need/want to finish/refine before make available any package.
That means Ant's analysis is a good approximation of reality.

OMG, but June is this month? I though it was the next one! :o :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on June 12, 2012, 04:48:43 AM
That means Ant's analysis is a good approximation of reality.

Don't say that. You'll ruin my reputation. :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Allstar12345 on June 12, 2012, 07:32:31 AM
Any news on SMF 2.1 release  ?
Still...let's say 3 major things (one of them it's Ant's fault and that's a hint) we need/want to finish/refine before make available any package. That means Ant's analysis is a good approximation of reality. OMG, but June is this month? I though it was the next one!
:P yeh years gone past quickly ;)
hope to see it soon :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on June 12, 2012, 01:40:43 PM
Don't forget that, realistically, we're still talking 6 months between any kind of package being released and a public 'stable' release.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on June 12, 2012, 05:11:15 PM
That sounds about right for a ballpark guesstimate.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Allstar12345 on June 13, 2012, 02:03:10 PM
Don't forget that, realistically, we're still talking 6 months between any kind of package being released and a public 'stable' release.
Hmm 6 months is a bit steep .
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on June 13, 2012, 02:04:11 PM
That's the thing, the first release is not nearly as widely tested and will have bugs in it, so you need to have that period of people actively using it finding bugs.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on June 13, 2012, 05:10:35 PM
/me doesn't write bugs! :P

/me hears the purples (and Spuds) coming and runs for his life!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: TigPT on July 03, 2012, 10:47:30 AM
Great work you are doing. Looking forward on this news. Just tell us how we can help.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Imutep on July 07, 2012, 06:13:12 AM
I'm new on smf, but what i've read here sounds great. SMF is knocking on the future.....
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Powerbob on August 05, 2012, 06:03:29 AM
Any news on 2.1 ?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 05, 2012, 09:10:13 AM
you can look yourself, at the git repository...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Fustrate on August 05, 2012, 09:25:15 AM
Lazy Kindred :P

https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 09:26:07 AM
The only problem with doing that is that people who shouldn't really be using it will end up using it and then complain that it isn't ready yet >_<
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 05, 2012, 11:39:05 AM
lol.. not lazy. Posting from a phone/tablet. :P

And yes, Arantor... but, on the other hand, it certainly beats us having to listen to "any news, any news, any news..." (ad inifinitum) from the moaners out there.


If you don't know what you're doing, then wait for the release...  if you want to know when the release will be ready, I point you to every single answer given previously - "It will be ready when it's ready"
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 11:42:04 AM
Quote
And yes, Arantor... but, on the other hand, it certainly beats us having to listen to "any news, any news, any news..." (ad inifinitum) from the moaners out there.

I'm not convinced. What I think will happen is that those who would moan about no news would moan it isn't ready, same reason why I won't give out the Wedge repo details - those who moan will find something to moan about, it'll just be moaning about something different, and personally I'd rather people moan about a delay rather than poor quality/rushed delivery.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 05, 2012, 04:08:04 PM
Hey you get to moan more than everyone else.  This time it is my turn:

:o
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 04:10:43 PM
Quote
Hey you get to moan more than everyone else.

I've earned the right :D

Quote
Why are you changing the "main_block.png" to "bars.png" and moving all the graphics around so that it is a time consuming PITA to guess at the format and make a new one?

I got nothing. This seems a bit bizarre.

Quote
What's with all the "smalltext" in displaytemplate.php?

Maybe one of the developers is being paid by a spectacles manufacturer to screw everyone's eyesight? :P Seriously, there is a lot of fluff in the display template and making it smaller would be better than leaving some of it as is.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 05, 2012, 04:12:58 PM
Maybe one of the developers is being paid by a spectacles manufacturer to screw everyone's eyesight? :P Seriously, there is a lot of fluff in the display template and making it smaller would be better than leaving some of it as is.

Aaaaaah!!! :)  Shouldn't it be moved to a css file?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 04:15:42 PM
Well, probably, yes.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: The Craw on August 05, 2012, 06:53:59 PM
The only problem with doing that is that people who shouldn't really be using it will end up using it and then complain that it isn't ready yet >_<

I figure anyone who can figure out how to make a copy of 2.1 or SMCore work is smart enough to understand why it isn't ready. Github isn't exactly a one-click installer. ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 06:58:48 PM
Never underestimate how far people will go to get what they think they want, only to be dissatisfied at the end of it.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on August 05, 2012, 07:15:08 PM
The only problem with doing that is that people who shouldn't really be using it will end up using it and then complain that it isn't ready yet >_<

Thats one downside of open source, we can't really hide an open source project.

Moaners will always moan no matter what, the really cool think about been an open source is that any feature request can be answered with a "commit or STFO" :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 07:17:05 PM
Quote
Thats one downside of open source, we can't really hide an open source project.

SMF did for years ;)

Quote
Moaners will always moan no matter what, the really cool think about been an open source is that any feature request can be answered with a "commit or STFO"

The problem with that approach is that you can't add in every commit, even if it follows all the coding standards because not all commits will suit the goals of the project as a whole.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on August 05, 2012, 07:25:20 PM
Quote
Thats one downside of open source, we can't really hide an open source project.

SMF did for years ;)


True, but then again SMF wasn't truly an open source project, we pretty much controlled the distribution, something that just don't get along with any open source license.

Quote
The problem with that approach is that you can't add in every commit, even if it follows all the coding standards because not all commits will suit the goals of the project as a whole.

Absolutely true, you can't just let anybody enter to your house :P  and I'm pretty sure there will be some pull request that will be denied, heck I have a couple of changes that I will like to have but I just didn't pull a request because I know those changes will never go into the main repo :D

That is why it is vital to keep a team, many people say that after the license change, there is no need to keep a SMF team, well, this is one of the reasons why it should be a team, kinda like a "quality control" team.

Sure, a lot of people will get upset about their commits not been included, that is just a thing we will have to deal just like we had to deal with moaners all those years :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 07:32:36 PM
Quote
True, but then again SMF wasn't truly an open source project, we pretty much controlled the distribution, something that just don't get along with any open source license.

2.0 is under a truly open source licence, and the 2.0 security releases were carried out under that restricted environment.

The licence does not affect the way in which the developers choose to develop the project, they are free to develop it entirely under wraps. I don't believe MyBB (LGPL) has their repo fully open to the world, for example.

Quote
and I'm pretty sure there will be some pull request that will be denied, heck I have a couple of changes that I will like to have but I just didn't pull a request because I know those changes will never go into the main repo

Yup, and that's part of the problem with open development, it makes such things absolutely transparent and if you're not interested in taking on external development much, or have a high standard, you might as well keep the repo private.

Quote
Sure, a lot of people will get upset about their commits not been included, that is just a thing we will have to deal just like we had to deal with moaners all those years

Except that you get that in addition to the 'I downloaded it but it isn't ready yet' moans. And that still doesn't detract from the 'why isn't it ready yet' moan. To me, it makes more work, not less.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on August 05, 2012, 07:42:21 PM
Quote
2.0 is under a truly open source licence, and the 2.0 security releases were carried out under that restricted environment.

The licence does not affect the way in which the developers choose to develop the project, they are free to develop it entirely under wraps. I don't believe MyBB (LGPL) has their repo fully open to the world, for example.

I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV so don't quote me on this but as far as I understand only 2.0 and forward are under an open source license, that is, any RC and 1.0 and 1.1 releases are still under the SMF license.

As for the development process, yes, the license doesn't force you to keep your environment open but, it is better to keep the "official" environment open than to let somebody else to upload the SMF code to bitbucket or whatever and to fool people to think that page is the official one.

We can't really stop people from doing that but at least we can be truly transparent about the "official" development and people can make their own conclusions on it.

Quote
Except that you get that in addition to the 'I downloaded it but it isn't ready yet' moans. And that still doesn't detract from the 'why isn't it ready yet' moan. To me, it makes more work, not less.

Yes I agree, there always will be people complaining about this, this will not change, it happen in the past and happens now and will happen on the future.

This doesn't have to do much with what license or develop environment we chose but has to do with the whole free thing, being free means a lot of people, different kind of people has access to this software, this will inevitably will attract people with, lests say, not so much understanding about software and stuff :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 07:45:34 PM
Quote
I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV so don't quote me on this but as far as I understand only 2.0 and forward are under an open source license, that is, any RC and 1.0 and 1.1 releases are still under the SMF license.

Correct.

Quote
As for the development process, yes, the license doesn't force you to keep your environment open but, it is better to keep the "official" environment open than to let somebody else to upload the SMF code to bitbucket or whatever and to fool people to think that page is the official one.

If that were to happen you could quite happily take action in those cases. The protections in the licence basically amount to that if someone wants to do so, it's still copyrighted to SMF and that they need to change the name of it otherwise.

Quote
This doesn't have to do much with what license or develop environment we chose but has to do with the whole free thing, being free means a lot of people, different kind of people has access to this software, this will inevitably will attract people with, lests say, not so much understanding about software and stuff

And that's my problem with it all: it means you get people seeing the code who shouldn't be let loose with it.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on August 05, 2012, 07:55:34 PM
Quote
If that were to happen you could quite happily take action in those cases. The protections in the licence basically amount to that if someone wants to do so, it's still copyrighted to SMF and that they need to change the name of it otherwise.

Of course, I was talking about the code and not so much a bout the trademark fulcrum and all that stuff, anyone can upload a 2.0 version on any site and do with that what ever they want, people aren't smart enough to properly understand the concept of fork so we will end up taking the blame anyways, that is why I think it will be better to just be truly open about this, if people are dumb, well, that is their problem, we are doing all we can, the rest is up to them :P

Quote
And that's my problem with it all: it means you get people seeing the code who shouldn't be let loose with it.

Yes, it is inevitable, we pretty much need to learn to live with it, there is no choice, hiding the development process will do more harm than good (specially because of our history), we have been persecuted for that for years :P

I think the benefits of being open overpass the downsides of it, if people moan we can always write something on the wiki and just put a link to that whenever there is a moaner.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 08:01:06 PM
Quote
Of course, I was talking about the code and not so much a bout the trademark fulcrum and all that stuff, anyone can upload a 2.0 version on any site and do with that what ever they want

I was talking about the code too. BSD is not a free pass, it still requires adhering to copyright law and passing-off laws.

Quote
Yes, it is inevitable, we pretty much need to learn to live with it, there is no choice, hiding the development process will do more harm than good (specially because of our history), we have been persecuted for that for years

Hmm. Time will tell.

Quote
I think the benefits of being open overpass the downsides of it, if people moan we can always write something on the wiki and just put a link to that whenever there is a moaner.

Personally I prefer to solve the problem rather than documenting a workaround ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on August 05, 2012, 08:04:46 PM
How exactly will you solved it ?  you can't denied anyone from downloading/uploading SMF.  I don't think it is a workaround, but rather an answer to a FAQ.

Thing is, being open or closed both has its ups and downs, open is the path SMF has decided and we must face any downside this path may have.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 05, 2012, 08:06:35 PM
Closed repo with frequent releases is the way to go, IMHO. But yeah, the path's been chosen for better and worse. Let's see where it goes.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 05, 2012, 10:05:36 PM
The only problem with doing that is that people who shouldn't really be using it will end up using it and then complain that it isn't ready yet >_<

Give me a breaK.  It was dumb luck I to it to work....  I have  no training...

I figure anyone who can figure out how to make a copy of 2.1 or SMCore work is smart enough to understand why it isn't ready. Github isn't exactly a one-click installer. ;)

How exactly will you solved it ?  you can't denied anyone from downloading/uploading SMF.  I don't think it is a workaround, but rather an answer to a FAQ.

Thing is, being open or closed both has its ups and downs, open is the path SMF has decided and we must face any downside this path may have.

Yea, ego is the the reason for the demise of "main_block".  That should be fixed till the end of SMF 2.0!  Multiple versions or forks alone will fail.  Divided we will fail.   United we will survive!
 
 >:(
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Fustrate on August 05, 2012, 10:32:26 PM
You can use main_block in your theme if you really want to. It's behind the times, though.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on August 06, 2012, 01:56:32 AM
Yea, ego is the the reason for the demise of "main_block".

Actually it isn't, but you just keep going, since you seem to be on a roll. :)

ETA: To address the other points..........

Hey you get to moan more than everyone else.  This time it is my turn:

  • Why are you changing the "main_block.png" to "bars.png" and moving all the graphics around so that it is a time consuming PITA to guess at the format and make a new one?
  • What's with all the "smalltext" in displaytemplate.php?
  • I am sure there is more...
:o

1/ Because the image no longer has any point in its 2.0 form. The structure of the theme has been simplified by removing all of the spans that took up a large part of the old main_block image. The header and footer of the theme no longer need the massive chunks of graphics that made up more large parts of the old image. The rounded corners are all done with CSS3 now. Etc.

Bascially, there is no point in having the old image any more. Since a lot of people apparently found the old image confusing, both in terms of css and in terms of editing the actual image, getting rid of it is perhaps not a total disaster. Getting rid of it will also slightly reduce bandwidth usage, since the new images are a lot lighter. The number of http requests for images is not increased over 2.0, so cache times should still be good.

IF you are concerned about the actual name of the image being changed, I cannot really see why this would be problematic. However, if enough people think it is problematic then the image can be called anything at all.

2/ It's a leftover from 2.0.x. I assume you think it is equally disastrous in 2.0.x. You may be pleased to know that, since this is an alpha build, things are likely to be cleaned up a bit before the final build.

3/ It's alpha, and it still contains unnecessary leftovers from 2.0.x so yes, there is bound to be more. I already have a personal hit list of "more".
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 06, 2012, 07:14:55 AM
Nope.  I was not happy with the mystery around "main_block.png".  The master file was not made public for some time after the release of 2.0.  I wasted a day making my own version for my forum.  I do not look forward a to repeat with "bars.png".

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on August 06, 2012, 07:23:29 AM
Since it is a far simpler image, it's not a one day job. More like a ten minute job. The image that is in the repo now is actually quite a bit more complicated than the final version is going to be. I'd suggest chilling out. The PSD's for any 2.1 images will be available well before the final build.

And although I'd have to check all the old topics, IIRC the PSD for Curve was made public with RC2. It was certainly public long before the release of 2.0 Final.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on August 06, 2012, 07:42:45 AM
Hey dude, the PSD for the Curve main_block was publicly released here: http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=347195.0

You replied to that topic right here: http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=347195.msg2352841#msg2352841

Now, you were saying? :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 06, 2012, 08:44:35 PM
Hey dude, the PSD was released WEEKS possibly months after the release of SMF gold.  Otherwise I would not have made my own!

The default theme psd was NOT released when gold was released and many had to go fish with the new psd file.  The dimensions were incorrect in your initial release and it did not work.  An actual release of the default theme PSD was really never made.  Therefore, I was forced to make my own...  Now I am pulling an "Arantor" because I remember the agony I went through...  Next, I will get a robot cat icon!
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ff0.bcbits.com%2Fz%2F41%2F50%2F4150807507-1.jpg&hash=43b96e48dfbe8116cfcafb0788382c06)
Then you will will listen...
 :o
I do not understand why no one could release the default theme psd when gold was released?  Instead it was a bug fat go fish.
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencenewsforkids.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F05%2FBiomimetic-Robotic-Fish.jpg&hash=9e0d4395c4d5c8db2a6bc36623b0969a)
Now I am on a roll...
 :P
I expect better this time around.   O:)  :laugh:
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 06, 2012, 08:47:38 PM
Quote
Now I am pulling an "Arantor" because I remember the agony I went through...  Next, I will get a robot cat icon!

That was below the belt :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Fustrate on August 06, 2012, 08:48:54 PM
Rehashing the PSD issue over and over, a long time after the fact, will definitely help get it released on time...

...when we get a time machine.

I trust that Ant will follow through with a PSD for 2.1. Complaining about the past does nothing at this point :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 06, 2012, 09:15:54 PM
You pushed me to continue. I thought I was the only one... Sorry, for trying to fix the future.  :-*

Quote
Now I am pulling an "Arantor" because I remember the agony I went through...  Next, I will get a robot cat icon!

That was below the belt :P

I did not know robots wore belts.   ???
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on August 06, 2012, 09:34:23 PM
Maybe he implied wrestling...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 06, 2012, 11:17:44 PM
ummmm... butchs...   from the thread that Ant linked, it certainly seems that the PSDs were released along with the final template update in RC3 (since the templates changes significantly between RC2 and RC3)

That was well before the final release
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on August 07, 2012, 02:02:51 AM
Hey dude, the PSD was released WEEKS possibly months after the release of SMF gold.  Otherwise I would not have made my own!

The default theme psd was NOT released when gold was released and many had to go fish with the new psd file.  The dimensions were incorrect in your initial release and it did not work.  An actual release of the default theme PSD was really never made.

I cordially suggest that perhaps your recollection of events is incomplete. I made a main_block PSD for the initial RC2 release of the Curve theme. It was released at the same time as RC2. Due to changes during development, the PSD (and the png made from it) required updating for later release candidates. This was done as required. Some updates were done by me, and some were done by other people, but they were all done.

2.0 Final was released on June 12, 2011. There were no changes to the main_block between RC4 and Final, so the existing RC4 image (which was already publicly available) should have been fine for 2.0 Final. If you were still attempting to use the initial RC2 main_block PSD then sure, it wouldn't be correct for 2.0 Final.

I zipped everything that was available in the way of PSD's for 2.0 Final and posted them here (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=438661.0) exactly one week after the official release of 2.0 Final. Not weeks, plural, and certainly not months. Note that this was just a compilation zip for convenience, and only contained images that had already been made available anyway.

These were the official images, and are exactly the same images that the actual default theme was made from. If you had asked me, in the topic you had already been involved in, where the images were, I would have told you.

If you chose to ignore eveything that had been made available, nobody else is responsible for your decision. If you wish to continue your roll, from now on you will have to do so without my participation.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on August 07, 2012, 03:20:14 AM
...when we get a time machine.
That's a feature for SMF...7? :P

I can only say that the new image is wonderful (from my poor theme-oriented mind) and I was able to change the main color of the new theme in less that half an hour (compared to the the fact that I've never been able to do it for 2.0... :-[ ...well, there was also a good component of laziness! :P).
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 07, 2012, 07:19:17 AM
...I zipped everything that was available in the way of PSD's for 2.0 Final and posted them here (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=438661.0)...

These were the official images, and are exactly the same images that the actual default theme was made from. If you had asked me, in the topic you had already been involved in, where the images were, I would have told you...

If you chose to ignore everything that had been made available...

Heres a thought for 2.1 add them to the download section under tools.  ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on August 07, 2012, 07:56:42 AM
Honestly there is nothing as complex as main_block in 2.1...
Would you really need a psd for these files? (see the attachments)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on August 07, 2012, 07:59:07 AM
Honestly there is nothing as complex as main_block in 2.1...
Would you really need a psd for these files? (see the attachments)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Orangine on August 07, 2012, 08:02:01 AM
ok emanuele, we got it the first time ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on August 07, 2012, 08:14:15 AM
/me is not a themer and he needs info on what they want to understand what he should give them.
Otherwise is just a waste of their and my time.

It's like the last fight between me and Ant on what is the best way to handle the needs of translation of complex strings and themes: I know the needs of translators (well, more or less), but I don't know what a themer (really) wants to be able to do, so I need to understand. And to understand I need to ask questions. If the questions are obvious...well, give me an obvious answer and I'm happy (even better if you can give me a workable alternative).
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 07, 2012, 09:34:16 PM
Honestly there is nothing as complex as main_block in 2.1...
Would you really need a psd for these files? (see the attachments)

I dunno.  Your pictures do not look as bad as what imagined it was... Looks like my original theme before the main block stressed me...  We will see when I get into the css.  I am sure I am in for a big css plunge when I start updating boardhover.  :o

Do like the idea of the curves in css, when I saw the main block I was wondering why they did not do it in css.  I assumed it was due to time...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on August 08, 2012, 03:18:06 AM
Honestly there is nothing as complex as main_block in 2.1...
Would you really need a psd for these files? (see the attachments)

They'll get PSD's anyway. Easy enough, so might as well.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Thantos on August 15, 2012, 12:51:06 PM
The PSDs could go in the repository since they are source material.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: .Vapor on September 04, 2012, 01:16:14 AM
Great news, glad to be back with smf..!

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: vivithemage on October 25, 2012, 12:48:13 PM
just keep on truckin :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: glennmckenna on January 13, 2013, 11:03:55 AM
now smf 3.0 sound interesting
love to know if work has started on it or not but i guess that you will only start work after 2.1 is out ?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on January 13, 2013, 11:05:11 AM
SMF 3.0 was started but all the people working on it all left for various reasons. All current dev effort appears to be on 2.1 at present judging by the Github account.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: glennmckenna on January 13, 2013, 11:09:51 AM
SMF 3.0 was started but all the people working on it all left for various reasons. All current dev effort appears to be on 2.1 at present judging by the Github account.
that's a petty that every one left  :(
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on January 15, 2013, 01:11:08 PM
I'd really like to see some of if not all you guys back together on this project. I'm not personally connected with you all, but aware of what some of you are capable of doing and accomplishing, when you put your minds to it!

I'm not a coder so I can't really speak for any of you , about how much time and effort must go in to the work here and there!
I know that some of you are working on your own stuff and allot it looks very nice and promising.

I have mentioned here as well as everywhere I go that I have tested many forums Commercial and Open source, complete CMS systems , Blogs and portals, and I have supported some, But for me there is nothing that comes close to the possibilities from a tester / User's view on what can be done with SMF and it's Variables ... I will not mention names , but there are many great codes visiting here and the other sites I go to and some were pioneers of this SMF system.

To make it short it would be nice after everyone takes a break from this project, that they'd all or some may possible come back with a fresh out look and points of view... You Guys all put so much into this and it such a great system, I would hate to see it even be limited to something other than the possibility of it's future!

I know it's allot of code and more complicated than I can imagine, but It's working and still the best as far as I can tell!
And even though some may not appear to appreciate what you all have and are doing, there sure are allot using it, and this site is getting allot of hits!

But that's me and the way I feel!
i love the SMF, can't help it!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>!
regards,
Maxx
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Road Rash Jr. on January 15, 2013, 01:55:23 PM
I couldn't agree with you more Maxg. It would appear that many have lost the incentive and drive. Now it looks more like a Charmin commercial. All warm and comfy, but once used it has no other purpose so into the toilet it goes. :'(
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on January 15, 2013, 02:01:56 PM
Quote
It would appear that many have lost the incentive and drive.

Respectfully, I would disagree with you. It is not the incentive or drive on its own that has gone. It is all that goes with it.

There are other places where the people who know and understand what is going on have made the real situation only too clear. Some of those people have been touted as being the only people who can fix this mess, though I'm not entirely sure that's true; there are others.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on February 16, 2013, 01:29:38 PM
I can only look at this from a user point of view, but seems to me, that there are still many interested in this and hooks and variations of the SMF!
Keeping in mind as always I love the SMF and the Ideas of some who have toyed and developed, various crossways in the road to how this system should be done, seems no one has lost interest. It just seems the project is getting real big and there may be many conflicting ideas on how it should be. And this type thing happens allot on the Big and The great and with people of the same rankings.

I know some have broken off and started on there on projects, and ideals, and I've seen some of them in action and the ones I've seen, all have very interesting functionality, as far as I can tell..

No I'm not gonna lose faith in the SMF...I would hate to see it go, Never found anything like it yet, and I'm experimenting as mention many times with many projects and CMS theme creations and seems none of them come close to SMF, with or with out getting way to complicated for the Normal User to operate without a webmaster or IT pro.

I love the ideas that Arantar / Nao and Bloc and some others I'm not familiar at all with, are going though, they are all thinking and debating on various topics, that seem to be way off course from each others thoughts...However to me they all seems so close. Like making the system user friendly, possibly lighter in weight. looks, less bloated and yet Up to the latest Browser engine friendliness. Not mention the Blog and social stuff.

I'm not gonna cut down anyone's ideas here because they are all good ones, just seems a shame that things have slowed down. It has come all this way !

I am certain there are many factors surrounding this like admin stuff and legal matters.

"In the living years"

regards,
Maxx


   
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on February 17, 2013, 08:50:13 AM
Good grief.  Why fight soooo much?   O:)

This is free software.  If it actually becomes worth something, I am sure some big American corporate conglomerate will just take the code.  Kinda like Apple did to shareware or Microsoft with up-start competitors.  So enjoy what you have, while you still have it, play nice and stop the petty bickering!
 :o
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 17, 2013, 08:53:40 AM
Because some of us actually care about SMF and don't want to see it die, yet year after year people are pushed out of the project because of fights that shouldn't even have started.

This project has been unwell for years. I'm still not sure that it's in a good place.

Ironically one of the biggest stumbling blocks is who owns the code - specifically so that it is protected against being bought up the way you suggest.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Nao 尚 on February 17, 2013, 02:55:27 PM
Because some of us actually care about SMF and don't want to see it die,
+1. We may be 'competition', but in the end we're still in love with SMF. We just wanted what was best for it -- and for us it meant doing our own thing without team interference.
I think it was the right decision because look at all we managed to do in 2.5 years without said interference... While the SMF dev team had to put up with so much crap.
And I'm not even blaming anyone for that... It's just a standard issue with 'design by committee'.
I think in the end, SMF will be better off once it gets rid of any semblance of democracy. Since it's unlikely to happen, I guess the only way for SMF to advance is to wait for a fork made under a 'dictatorship' policy, and reintegrate it fully into SMF -- me sees ElkArte as the very likely candidate for this, given that it's been advancing very quickly since it started (precisely because of the reduced team input), and it's committed to making SMF more modern. I'm even wondering if ElkArte isn't, by definition, destined to be SMF 3.0, and was never thought of as a proper fork... Rather, simply a better, safer, *simpler* environment for the 2011-2012 SMF dev team to work under.

Ah, sorry, I'm just typing my thoughts as they come up... I probably should shut up  O:)

Quote
This project has been unwell for years. I'm still not sure that it's in a good place.
We've seen many forks die (I think it's pretty safe to say that unfortunately, EosAlpha isn't going anywhere, due to lack of traction), yet SMF is still (barely) alive. I've also seen many interesting forum and non-forum projects die in the 3-4 years since I've been very much into open source.
So... Basically, I'm of the opinion that SMF will outlive most forum systems, it just isn't going to be very lively for the foreseeable future. And I guess it's okay. Plus, it gives Elk and Wedge a chance to steal some momentum from time to time...  ;D

Quote
Ironically one of the biggest stumbling blocks is who owns the code - specifically so that it is protected against being bought up the way you suggest.
My opinion is that this will eventually be resolved, considering that Angelina pretty much agreed that the Elk team was mostly right about copyright ownership.
I don't really care about that myself, though... It's simpler when there are only two 'registered' developers, I guess!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on February 17, 2013, 05:14:39 PM
If it was possible, I know of a surprisingly large number of people who wish they could spin time back and stop certain events from happening, so the various schisms didn't occur.

If I, personally, could get both Arantor and Nao 尚 back on the ol' team, it'd happen tomorrow.

Sadly, I think I have more chance of crapping on the moon.

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.katzy.dsl.pipex.com%2FSmileys%2Fc007.gif&hash=2c093c7d32276496a269b37c42ddc590)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 17, 2013, 05:57:16 PM
Given the way certain members of the team are reacting to what I'm saying, it isn't ever going to happen.

In the last hour or so, I have been accused of what amounts to starting and spreading malicious rumours about SMF and lying about it in an attempt to promote another product. By a team member, no less.

So I'm going to say exactly what I have said to this person in private: tell me where I'm 'lying'. Tell me what it is I'm supposed to be lying about. Bring it out in to the public. Make your claim, let me defend myself and what I have to say - not that I'm going to have any trouble defending myself.

Maybe instead of this cloak and dagger crap, and walking around pretending nothing's wrong, the problems that are going on might actually get *fixed* instead of pretending everything's wonderful when anyone who spends a few minutes observing what has transpired will see it clearly isn't, given the complete change over of SMF team even since the RCs and the way the dev teams of successive generations have all gone elsewhere.

I remember how in 2010 when all this really blew up, the community were promised more openness. More transparency. The team were also promised this - but events in recent weeks have made it clear that even that isn't the case.

/throws gauntlet
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 17, 2013, 06:28:34 PM
This doesn't really belong here...   but what events of recent weeks?   And what transparency (or lack there of)?

I don't know what you've been accused of lying about... but if it was the comment that Nao made above, about Elkarte folks and the statement from the lawyers regarding copyright, I will state that, whoever claimed on Elkarte that "they were right all along" was hallucinating and has it completely turned around.

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 17, 2013, 06:39:37 PM
Quote
but what events of recent weeks?

How could you forget the 9 page topic elsewhere on this? :(

Quote
And what transparency

Like the fact that no-one on the team is going to stand up, here, and actually admit 1) there's a problem, 2) that the problem needs fixing and 3) talking to the community about fixing it.

For example... this whole debate on the copyright. It's a pretty big issue that affects anyone who's ever contributed to the project's source code at any point, including people committing via GitHub with a DCO. But had it not been for Norv doing what we both agree was handled badly, plus (months later) taking it to a lawyer, plus having to be pushed multiple times, before there's anything resembling a conclusion.

Oh wait. Would that be the conclusion where things have been done and *nobody knew about it*?

This is one of the cornerstones of a community: communicating between yourselves. It's certainly clear that there has been a great deal of misunderstanding (mostly) and miscommunication (a little, but mostly it's not intentional, nor is it malicious in nature)

I found it hilarious that an official representative went and spoke to ElkArte (only to be accused of stirring up drama) and not to us, though by the time that had happened, I'd already been told by multiple people the way things were headed - and I'm not a team member, thank the deities. So there's another problem.

Quote
I don't know what you've been accused of lying about...

Neither do I.

Quote
but if it was the comment that Nao made above, about Elkarte folks and the statement from the lawyers regarding copyright, I will state that, whoever claimed on Elkarte that "they were right all along" was hallucinating and has it completely turned around.

Firstly, the phrase was 'mostly right'. Secondly, that is a dramatic oversimplification, but as we hammered out at wedge.org, they actually were kind of right, certainly more correct than what was there before.

This would be the same 9 page discussion where you spent a great deal of time telling me I was wrong, even though I pretty much called it the same way the lawyers did. Funny that.

We shouldn't even be having this conversation. It shouldn't be necessary because it shouldn't need me - an outsider to all intents and purposes - to act as a sort of watchdog, or play referee, however you want to call it.

We shouldn't be having this conversation because instead of talking to the community about it and explaining what was going on and why (you know, being transparent), there should have been an announcement which would have probably settled the matter. Small wonder there have been accusations of copyright grabbing, though they're probably as spurious as other claims. At least, I'd like to think so.


So, what's the real state of smCore? What's the real state of SMF 2.1? Your community is watching. They deserve to have their faith rewarded.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: CoreISP on February 17, 2013, 08:06:49 PM
Quote
Like the fact that no-one on the team is going to stand up, here, and actually admit 1) there's a problem, 2) that the problem needs fixing and 3) talking to the community about fixing it.

I think that might show more that not being on the team and only acting on "what I've heard" may show it's better if internal material stays being handled internal and release what's prudent to be released on own accord, as wrong conclusion can be drawn easily based on "what i've heard", as I think you know pretty well.

Of course, you are entitled to your own opinion. :)

Quote
For example... this whole debate on the copyright. It's a pretty big issue that affects anyone who's ever contributed to the project's source code at any point, including people committing via GitHub with a DCO. But had it not been for Norv doing what we both agree was handled badly, plus (months later) taking it to a lawyer, plus having to be pushed multiple times, before there's anything resembling a conclusion.

As you say, handled badly. I think there isn't much debate required on that.
The problem has been fixed. Whether that took a while to make sure it was done thoroughly or not is subject to debate, perhaps, but i'm not sure what people rather see: doing stuff without thinking or talking (ergo: handling it badly) or making very sure everything is done correctly... The latter usually takes more time. And sure, you may label that as slow. To me, I feel the end result is most important: is a problem fixed or not? Yes? Good.

I guess it's a matter of personal favor. :)

Regarding communication and nobody knew about it: True. But, I think you know why nobody on the team knew about the, now perfectly (imho) solved, issue. :)
You said it yourself, it was handled badly by a, at that point, third party.

Quote
Neither do I.

I had actually hoped you would rephrase that post, I know you have seen that I had corrected your assumption. As such: "Neither do I?" That makes two of us. :)

Quote
they actually were kind of right, certainly more correct than what was there before.

Nobody denied there was a problem. It was just pointed out there was a major flaw in the extraordinary poor way it was executed, with which for the latter part you seem to agree. :)

And as you so elequently put: communication is key. ;)
When there is none... Well... Can't expect something to change if a problem is not presented to the responsible team in any way. No psychics around here. :P
Another example of that is the recent security issue that was patched with SMF 2.0.4. We would have never known about it if it was not reported by the person who found the security leak. :) But, that person chose to inform us and the security problem was fixed very fast by the excellent effort Emanuele put in to it. Had nobody told us about that issue, it would be impossible to know about it and thusly it would not have been fixed.
And that goes for any type of problem. :) Without telling the team if they are unware: it will not be fixed as you need to be aware of a problem before you can patch it up. :)

Quote
We shouldn't be having this conversation because instead of talking to the community about it and explaining what was going on and why (you know, being transparent), there should have been an announcement which would have probably settled the matter. Small wonder there have been accusations of copyright grabbing, though they're probably as spurious as other claims. At least, I'd like to think so.

Well perhaps, instead of playing referee or how ever you wish to call it yourself, you should actually leave it up to the team to work on releasing news when the need is there, how and how fast. Perhaps instead of saying everything should be done instantly, you should leave it up to the team to chose what, how and when to do something.
Perhaps your preference is to rush things and ours is not.
I by no means wish to offend you, but... Perhaps I will, by saying: I think you may sometimes rush things too quickly. For example the previous post you made was done in an extreme rush based on a wrong assumption. That's why I personally enjoy seeing people taking their time before taking action. :)

Does that really make SM/SMF so bad because the opinion on speed differs? :)
Like I said, I think that's a matter of opinion and personal preference. You can choose to do that differently, of course.

I mean, you started a fork because you have different ideas about the software and everything. While the way of working there may work for you I'm not sure why you think it should work that way for everyone. If my conclusion is correct on that you think as such, anyway. :) I might be completely wrong. After all, i'm just drawing conclusions here as well based on what you said; but words can most obviously be misinterpreted.

Don't get me wrong by the way, I hope you don't see this as an attack to you. You share your opinion, I share mine. Before you, like on the messenger, draw the wrong conclusion on what I'm saying: I enjoy your presence and effort here, most of the time anyway lol, and it is a good thing you express your, passionate I might add, opinion. Let us be clear on that.
I do hope you respect my views on things as well, though. Mutual respect is important imho.

Quote
So, what's the real state of smCore? What's the real state of SMF 2.1? Your community is watching. They deserve to have their faith rewarded.

Indeed, they do. So rather than making assumptions, perhaps patience is more in order and let SM/SMF decide on when to release whatever there is to release if/when anything news is there to be released, rather than wanting people to rush it.
We're not in a rush and take time extensively to see what the best way forward is with all projects under the SM umbrella, including but not limited to smCore. Projects are being checked and when anything new is there to be announced: the community will always be informed. We haven't done anything else in the past, nor will we in the future. I'm not sure where you get the idea from that SMF would not keep the community informed.
But... when you're not on the team or NPO group, it is of course hard to know all the ins & outs on the status of projects, status of news releases, whatever. :) And again, personal preference.


The state of SMF 2.1 isn't so hard to find by the way: it is moving forward properly. Perhaps somewhat slow compared to other forum software out there, but SMF doesn't exactly have a reputation of being lightning fast with releases and I personally don't think there is anything wrong with that.
SMF 2.x is a rock solid SMF edition, making new releases simply for the sake of releasing is pretty much not how SMF has rolled in the past and I don't think it should ever.
You may disagree with the speed, but I personally do hope you do not disagree with the statement that the releases that SMF does make are very stable and as bug-free as possible. Perhaps personal preference on some pieces of code aside :) Quality over quantity, that's what, at least in my experience and opinion, SMF is about.

That's all. :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 17, 2013, 08:54:39 PM
Quote
I think that might show more that not being on the team and only acting on "what I've heard" may show it's better if internal material stays being handled internal and release what's prudent to be released on own accord, as wrong conclusion can be drawn easily based on "what i've heard", as I think you know pretty well.

Of course it can. That's part of the problem. The fact that nothing ever seems to happen without some kind of issue flaring up to prompt some kind of action. See point about *transparency*.

I shouldn't have to make inferences about this stuff. This is one of the reasons SMF finds it so hard to recruit developers, because no-one wants to trust it, and with good reason given what's happened before - once they get behind The Wall, they see how it really is, how it's been for years.

I can only speculate that this is the big reason behind keeping things 'under wraps'.

Quote
The problem has been fixed. Whether that took a while to make sure it was done thoroughly or not is subject to debate, perhaps, but i'm not sure what people rather see: doing stuff without thinking or talking (ergo: handling it badly) or making very sure everything is done correctly... The latter usually takes more time. And sure, you may label that as slow. To me, I feel the end result is most important: is a problem fixed or not? Yes? Good.

You mean a problem that most wouldn't have even realised SMF had, had it not been pre-empted? A problem that some people are pretending didn't exist and that wasn't a problem in the first place?

A problem that those impacted by it may not even have been contacted about yet? (Those who signed a CLA and committed material while the CLA was still in force, they're probably assumed to have consented. Anyone else, e.g. DCO contributors... that's a different matter.)

Quote
Well perhaps, instead of playing referee or how ever you wish to call it yourself, you should actually leave it up to the team to work on releasing news when the need is there, how and how fast. Perhaps instead of saying everything should be done instantly, you should leave it up to the team to chose what, how and when to do something.

Here's the thing. I shouldn't have to get involved. But I don't feel I can sit back.

Take the current copyright issue. How long has that been going on? How many months ago was it that a developer, who by then had left, whose access to the repository hadn't been removed, came back to quietly make a huge change? Without even getting into the 'how did it happen' malarky... why did it take so long to figure out that going to a lawyer was necessary? Why wasn't a lawyer consulted as soon as the NPO took over, to clarify what the NPO actually had copyright to? (Because if it was, none of this would have been an issue in the first place) But instead it was done over 18 months later, only after someone had already tampered with it.

This is the sort of issue that really gets my goat: SMF is floundering by any measure you care to name, and a lot of that is managerial issues.

Quote
Does that really make SM/SMF so bad because the opinion on speed differs?

There's slow, there's slow, and there's what I can only call burying heads in sand and hoping the problem goes away.

Quote
Don't get me wrong by the way, I hope you don't see this as an attack to you.

It's not an attack on me, nor do I see it as one. You're one of the few people I've had the pleasure of talking to who can actually attack a position, not a person. In reciprocation, I'm trying hard not to target a single individual for anything that's gone on here. I don't care who did (or did not) do something. I'm just annoyed that stuff isn't happening when if SMF wants to survive, it needs to start happening.

Quote
We're not in a rush and take time extensively to see what the best way forward is with all projects under the SM umbrella, including but not limited to smCore. Projects are being checked and when anything new is there to be announced: the community will always be informed. We haven't done anything else in the past, nor will we in the future. I'm not sure where you get the idea from that SMF would not keep the community informed.

Well, let's see... no-one appears to be saying or doing anything about the fact that smCore is dead and isn't going to be relaunched in any practical form (seeing how all of its contributors left). So, what's the plan?

Here's the thing: SMF is a project in dire need of competent developers. No developer is going to magically come along and rescue the project, especially not with all the horror stories. I keep hearing talk of how it's all different now, but I'm just not convinced.

But anyway, the question of the hour: does anyone have anything resembling a plan at all? Is anyone going to share with the community what that plan might be?

What's left to do in 2.1? If anyone had any idea of what was missing, maybe you'd get some help.

Is there going to be a 2.2? Or will the next version be 3.0? What's the plan for these things? Is there a plan? Assuming there is a plan and someone has some idea what's going on, who's going to go build it?

Which brings me back to the small matter of the lack of devs. If you communicate with the community about the plan, there is a small chance - and it is, sadly, small, though not as small as straight up wishful thinking - that a developer might be inclined to get involved.

I am aware that even discussing this issue publicly is going to put potential developers off as things stand - but I'm also aware that people who go into something with the best of intentions might be soured by what they find. Forewarned is forearmed, as they say.

Quote
The state of SMF 2.1 isn't so hard to find by the way: it is moving forward properly. Perhaps somewhat slow compared to other forum software out there, but SMF doesn't exactly have a reputation of being lightning fast with releases and I personally don't think there is anything wrong with that.

There's only one software going more slowly than SMF right now, and that's XenForo.

As for not having a reputation of going 'lightning fast', there's another reason why all the momentum left and took most of the competent developers with it. Not going 'lightning fast' is one thing, but taking 18 months to get to the level of perceived change in 2.1 seems... slow. I've tried 2.1, and while what there is is good (and due credit to the people who made it what it is), it doesn't really feel like a huge step forward.

Before anyone waves the 'but Wedge has had 2 1/2 years', yes it's had 2 1/2 years. It's also had tens of thousands of lines of iterations and coming up to 2,000 (SVN, not Git) commits, including a redesigned theme engine, a rebuilt from scratch package manager and so on. Small changes like what 2.1 looks like should not take 18 months.

I'm well aware that things take time, and that quality should not be rushed, but this seems wrong somehow.

Quote
SMF 2.x is a rock solid SMF edition, making new releases simply for the sake of releasing is pretty much not how SMF has rolled in the past and I don't think it should ever.

It is pretty solid, yes, necessitating 4 patches in 1 1/2 years is good going (for comparison, SMF 1.1.x had 18 patches across 6 1/2 years, roughly 3/year). But if you're not going to release, need to keep in touch with users, to let them know what's going on. I find this very topic hilarious, given that it was set out by the previous lead dev last year about a plan that doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on February 17, 2013, 10:40:30 PM
I haven't been all that active in the daily project stuff, not being a project member, but I'll try to comment on a few things.

This is by no means any kind of official statement. It's simply my personal opinions. It is possible that the BoD or Simple Machines may disagree with some things I post.

The fact that nothing ever seems to happen without some kind of issue flaring up to prompt some kind of action. See point about *transparency*.

Agreed that it's a bad way to do things, but it seems that nobody really tries to call out concerns in any way other than something that causes internal fighting. Not that it's a solid rule, mind you. Some people do actually bring up concerns in a less-dramatic way. However, drama seems to be the norm.


I shouldn't have to make inferences about this stuff. This is one of the reasons SMF finds it so hard to recruit developers, because no-one wants to trust it, and with good reason given what's happened before - once they get behind The Wall, they see how it really is, how it's been for years.

Would you argue for read-only access to the general public for all internal boards (save for some areas limited where sensitive info can be discussed)? Just curious on how transparent you feel things should be.


I can only speculate that this is the big reason behind keeping things 'under wraps'.

At least some of it is for "information management". Basically, determining what the best way would be to post certain things. Nothing nefarious, but sometimes just putting out raw info can lead to all kinds of misunderstandings, especially with preliminary info.


You mean a problem that most wouldn't have even realised SMF had, had it not been pre-empted? A problem that some people are pretending didn't exist and that wasn't a problem in the first place?

If it had been brought up in a less dramatic way, it might have been handled better. Maybe. We'll never know, since that wasn't what happened.


A problem that those impacted by it may not even have been contacted about yet? (Those who signed a CLA and committed material while the CLA was still in force, they're probably assumed to have consented. Anyone else, e.g. DCO contributors... that's a different matter.)

I believe the CLA would cover any adjustment of the copyright line. Also, AFAIK, the line simply updated the understanding to match the new DCO. The legal counsel was provided with the paperwork covering both the old CLA and the new DCO.

However, it's a good question to see if contributors need to be contacted/notified of the change. I'll forward that concern so it can be checked.

Take the current copyright issue. How long has that been going on? How many months ago was it that a developer, who by then had left, whose access to the repository hadn't been removed, came back to quietly make a huge change? Without even getting into the 'how did it happen' malarky... why did it take so long to figure out that going to a lawyer was necessary?

I think right after that change, it was figured out that it was really important to check with someone with legal experience on a proper wording. So, the answer to that would be on the order of minutes to hours. The insane fighting over reverting it to the old wording while a check was being done really delayed the actual work on obtaining legal advice.

Why wasn't a lawyer consulted as soon as the NPO took over, to clarify what the NPO actually had copyright to?

Can't speak to that one, I wasn't part of the team that handled that stuff. I can only speculate that with all the other work of moving ownership, it was overlooked. Too bad it wasn't suggested to review it sooner.


This is the sort of issue that really gets my goat: SMF is floundering by any measure you care to name, and a lot of that is managerial issues.

Agreed, mostly. There are managerial issues, but it seems a lot of people involved take anything very personally. It makes it difficult to get anything moving when there are people fighting entrenched positions who don't like "compromise" or other such words. Add to that the seeming lack of desire to actually be part of the management of the project, and you wind up with a very few people who are overworked doing what amounts to a second full-time job in their spare time.

Seriously, it's painful to see people leave the corporation and give up their voting rights who then complain and throw a fight when something is done that they don't like. They could have voted against it if they were involved, but they gave up that ability.


Before anyone waves the 'but Wedge has had 2 1/2 years', yes it's had 2 1/2 years. It's also had tens of thousands of lines of iterations and coming up to 2,000 (SVN, not Git) commits, including a redesigned theme engine, a rebuilt from scratch package manager and so on. Small changes like what 2.1 looks like should not take 18 months.

Well, at least some of the time was re-assembling a development team from the pieces left after the project changed ownership. Also add in the time taken to get all the structure set up and having the developers discuss a roadmap. Oh, and the fight over pinning the future on smCore (and abandoning any development on SMF 2 except for security fixes) versus running small development sprints on 2.x while smCore was built. Good thing development continued on 2.x, smCore is basically dead.



I think that's enough for now. I welcome further discussion.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: CoreISP on February 17, 2013, 10:43:27 PM
Quote
Of course it can. That's part of the problem. The fact that nothing ever seems to happen without some kind of issue flaring up to prompt some kind of action. See point about *transparency*.

I shouldn't have to make inferences about this stuff. This is one of the reasons SMF finds it so hard to recruit developers, because no-one wants to trust it, and with good reason given what's happened before - once they get behind The Wall, they see how it really is, how it's been for years.

I can only speculate that this is the big reason behind keeping things 'under wraps'.

Well, I guess that's a matter of perspective.
Like I pointed out: problems cannot be solved if they are not put to attention of the team. :)

The methods of contacting the team are there, and there are a lot of them.
You seem, and please do correct me if I'm wrong, to imply that each and every *potential* problem that could be in SMF has to be known by the team. See my reference to the security issue that 2.0.4 patched how that's not possible. :) And I do have my doubts when typing this because I know you're quite reasonable with the reasoning, so perhaps I am not fully understanding what it is you want here. Anyway, yes: some issues require an action before it prompts action from the team.
I don't consider that to be anything strange. I'm not sure why "conventional methods" could not be used to make the team aware, though. :)
I do agree whole heartidly that it is sometimes excruciatingly difficult to get something moving around here. No doubt. But... That's what happens when you're working with volunteers. :) People have lives. (At least, some of us *grin*)

Well, I indeed think you shouldn't have to nor do I think you should have. And just for the record: By that I'm not implying you shouldn't give your opinion. It's just a mere observation from my perspective that makes me conclude that there was indeed not much need to do that. We can obviously disagree.
I think we are a bit on a different page on that aspect, anyway.
I would disagree with the "behind the wall" thing, but making an educated guess here I think it will best to agree to disagree on that part, heh. :)

As for keeping things "under wraps", I must say I totally disagree with you on that.
Nothing important is being kept under wraps here at SM. You may disagree, again, on the speed... But that's a personal preference.
I think we're quite, if not very, transparent and share a lot with the community and I think me (openly I might add) debating this with you is quite the proof of that, but indeed: all in good time whenever there is something to be released eventually. First things first. Just like with releases, things are ironed out completely until there is no, to the best of the available knowledge, problem left and ensure it is fixed for the full hundred percent before moving forward.
It's almost as if you feel we should make the FTC a completely publicly visible board. For the record: I know that's not what you're suggesting, but you are making a imho unfounded accusation that things are being kept under the wrap but it seems solely based on your feeling that come forth out of a, in your eyes, speed issue. You mistake speed, or lack thereof, for deliberate silence. That is not the case though. I think this may be a problem because you are commenting on project related issues of which you obtained some information, but you cannot see the developments. In short: you are commenting on a team based issue without being on the team. That may lead to some misinterpretations and wrong assumptions because you cannot get accurate updates on the information you have been fed.

While opinions may defer on the speed, I'm not sure why to choose, I guess, not to respect the way SM/SMF handles it. You can disagree on how it's done and/or how fast, of course, but does that warrant releasing info ever so slightly this way? :) I'd say no, but that's rather irrelevant at this point. :P
You claim, while not being able to see everything, that it was chosen not to disclose anything, but that's something only someone outside the team can assume and indeed: speculate on. That doesn't necessarily make it a true fact, as it is not. :)
I think it all boils down to a difference in opinion. In the end, it's debating something in progress, unreleased.

If things would have truly been kept "under wraps", wouldn't I have removed all your posts and banned you by now? :P

Quote
You mean a problem that most wouldn't have even realised SMF had, had it not been pre-empted? A problem that some people are pretending didn't exist and that wasn't a problem in the first place?

Well, like I said, you cannot seriously expect a team to know about each and every problem a piece of software may have.
Again, I'm referring to the way we learned about the SMF 2.0.3 security issue leading to the 2.0.4 patch. If nobody talked to us: there would most likely not have been a 2.0.4 yet and the vulnerability would slumber still.
Many things, such as bugs (I mean, take the SMF 2.1 repo, if we didn't have beta testers... woo. :P) are squashed by the team. But not *everything* can be known to the team at all times, even despite the rigorous checks.
I won't apologize for the project being imperfect :P


Quote
Take the current copyright issue. How long has that been going on? How many months ago was it that a developer, who by then had left, whose access to the repository hadn't been removed, came back to quietly make a huge change? Without even getting into the 'how did it happen' malarky... why did it take so long to figure out that going to a lawyer was necessary? Why wasn't a lawyer consulted as soon as the NPO took over, to clarify what the NPO actually had copyright to? (Because if it was, none of this would have been an issue in the first place) But instead it was done over 18 months later, only after someone had already tampered with it.

The need for that became clear within a matter of days in order to sort it out once and for all. :)
Finding a suitable solution is another story, but again: While you may feel rush should be the way to go and a fix should be there within a matter of minutes, I don't think that is the way to go at all. Sure, it went slower than it could have went, but what does that matter if it is sorted out properly eventually? This is a volunteer project, it's not exactly people being paid to work around the clock. :D
Better make sure it's done right and, as this project doesn't run on water, without costing tons. ;)

When the NPO took over there was a different situation, by the way. :) Please do not forget that.
The issue you are referring to was *not* an issue when the NPO was formed, or that is to say: Not in it's current form, it was handled differently at the time. Changes over the years however generated a new problem that was indeed not seen at first sight. And it pretty much isn't an issue anymore now though. :)

Quote
There's slow, there's slow, and there's what I can only call burying heads in sand and hoping the problem goes away.

Well, you're free to call it what you want, heh. :D I am glad to tell you it's not the correct assumption to make though. It is regrettably indeed an assumption, and it's too bad you think so negative about it. That's up to you, of course. But please, don't make the mistake of seeing that assumption as a immediate fact. :)
You'd be surprised! And I hope you will be pleasantly surprised in the (near) future, even though you, like I am as well, can be hard to please in my experience.
Just... Patience! (I'd almost add "young Padawan!" to that, but you're near officially OLD. No worries, you don't have to thank me for saying that. :P)


Quote
It's not an attack on me, nor do I see it as one. You're one of the few people I've had the pleasure of talking to who can actually attack a position, not a person. In reciprocation, I'm trying hard not to target a single individual for anything that's gone on here. I don't care who did (or did not) do something. I'm just annoyed that stuff isn't happening when if SMF wants to survive, it needs to start happening.

I am glad to hear that. :) Oh I think you succeed pretty well in that, you seem to target it "as a whole" rather than pointing multiple fingers at multiple individuals. I applaud that.

Well I could start with a horrible cliche here that has something to do with Rome, heh, but let me just point out that I don't see much threats to SMF's future. Even though indeed, the past is something to learn from and that's a good thing: better the process, better the environment. There have most certainly been some mistakes, some good things mistaken for mistakes and good things in a whole. It just strikes me that people in general usually solely focus on the negative instead of the good and the bad, and that on my part slightly annoys me heh. But, that would almost indicate I have no right to be on the internet; the internet is nearly all about complaining rather than applauding or a combination of those two these days. :D Opinions can be annoying/offensive, dealll wiithhh itttt. I probably offended enough people with my opinions, so it would be a bit hypocrite to start boohooing over an opinion of someone else myself, LOL.

Quote
Well, let's see... no-one appears to be saying or doing anything about the fact that smCore is dead and isn't going to be relaunched in any practical form (seeing how all of its contributors left). So, what's the plan?

All in good time. :) Appearances can be deceiving, might I just note that. And you can ask anyone on the team to confirm that if you do not wish to take my word for it. :)


Quote
Here's the thing: SMF is a project in dire need of competent developers. No developer is going to magically come along and rescue the project, especially not with all the horror stories. I keep hearing talk of how it's all different now, but I'm just not convinced.

Indeed it is. Or that is to at least say: More of them!
As for horror stories... Meh. :) We do not have to agree, I guess.
I think that perhaps a whole fresh load of devs might prove to be a different situation than the same people being involved all the time. Fresh winds and bla.


Quote
But anyway, the question of the hour: does anyone have anything resembling a plan at all? Is anyone going to share with the community what that plan might be?

Yes.


Quote
What's left to do in 2.1? If anyone had any idea of what was missing, maybe you'd get some help.

Is there going to be a 2.2? Or will the next version be 3.0? What's the plan for these things? Is there a plan? Assuming there is a plan and someone has some idea what's going on, who's going to go build it?

Well, perhaps that's a good thing to ask the developers. :)
Duly noted: you, and probably more people, are in need of a status update on 2.1.
Granted, I do not think the developers will have any problems at all divulging that information and I would be very happy if people stepped up to help: it may speed things up! :) Help is appreciated and it is what makes it community driven.

For 2.2 and 3.0 and let me rephrase that in to a word that catches it all: A roadmap, I will refer back to the developers again. It's as they say not my party nor my area of expertise or prime activity.


Quote
Which brings me back to the small matter of the lack of devs. If you communicate with the community about the plan, there is a small chance - and it is, sadly, small, though not as small as straight up wishful thinking - that a developer might be inclined to get involved.

I am aware that even discussing this issue publicly is going to put potential developers off as things stand - but I'm also aware that people who go into something with the best of intentions might be soured by what they find. Forewarned is forearmed, as they say.

For 2.1 there is no immediate lack of developers, but as always: we are looking for talent.

Well, I hope it does not. Nobody bites ya know. :D
But sure, everyone could be disappointed, but it can go another way as well: sheer happines to be working on a still very much promising project. Past is past, and the past has given valueable lessons.
Although that is not to say you may ofcourse 100% agree on working methods, I guess that's what lead to your fork spawning, for example.


Quote
There's only one software going more slowly than SMF right now, and that's XenForo.

As for not having a reputation of going 'lightning fast', there's another reason why all the momentum left and took most of the competent developers with it. Not going 'lightning fast' is one thing, but taking 18 months to get to the level of perceived change in 2.1 seems... slow. I've tried 2.1, and while what there is is good (and due credit to the people who made it what it is), it doesn't really feel like a huge step forward.

Before anyone waves the 'but Wedge has had 2 1/2 years', yes it's had 2 1/2 years. It's also had tens of thousands of lines of iterations and coming up to 2,000 (SVN, not Git) commits, including a redesigned theme engine, a rebuilt from scratch package manager and so on. Small changes like what 2.1 looks like should not take 18 months.

I'm well aware that things take time, and that quality should not be rushed, but this seems wrong somehow.

I'll take your word on XenForo, I don't know them.

Well, in regards to SMF 2.1. I guess it's a matter of taste. And perhaps also a reason why you took the road of creating a fork.
Whilst SMF 2.1 might not be a complete rewrite and a new SMF from near scratch, I'm not sure if it has to be.
SMF 2.1 will be offering some splendid new functionality, rewritten parts, patched up current functionality, more in par with "today's world", et cetera. Is it a 100% new product? Nope. Does it *have* to be? Imho: Nope.
There are even still people on SMF 1.x (sadly, also on 1.0.x, although it does show how much of a robust product SMF is which makes me quite happy.) that haven't even touched SMF 2.x. It shows SMF on it's self is a highly solid product which covers the needs of many people. Had it not, we wouldn't have so many users, of course.

You're free to be disappointed because you had hoped to see far more changes and a 100% new SMF product, but I have a opposite preference: I like SMF sticking to it's root in large lines but DOES take wishes of the community, and of course: self made up new functions, rewrites, etc, in mind with the upcomming SMF 2.1. It's a blend of both... Innovating, renewing and changing while, however, sticking to roots that made SMF such a major succesful piece of software in the first place, the product that is loved by many people. I think 2.1 shows to be a perfect combination of innovation, based on community feedback and ideas of the team, and staying true to the essence of SMF itself by not making a 100% new product.
(My god, that whole part sounds horribly OMG MARKETING!!1! but it is my sincere personal opinion on the software.)

I mean, if you look at it that way: SMF 2.x wasn't a super huge change over SMF 1.x either: SMF 2.x also remained true to it's roots set out in SMF 1.x. Did it come with new functionality, a new design, large rewritten parts: Absolutely. But in essence, SMF is still SMF. The same is happening with SMF 2.1. Although, I ofcourse must admit SMF 2.x did have some *major* code differences over 1.x. (That is NOT to say that 2.1 doesn't have that. But, perhaps less than what you personally had hoped for. Which is probably another reason why you chose to make a rewrite of your own.)

Perhaps it could have been done faster, perhaps it could not have been. We had a few setbacks.
But... SMF 2.1 is getting closer to a release each day that passes. And that is a prime example of what I see as a good thing.
Yeah, you can certainly argue it's taken it's damn time... But you can also look on the bright side of life (yep, that was a reference.) and focus on happy thoughts: It's getting closer to RC status day by day.


Quote
It is pretty solid, yes, necessitating 4 patches in 1 1/2 years is good going (for comparison, SMF 1.1.x had 18 patches across 6 1/2 years, roughly 3/year). But if you're not going to release, need to keep in touch with users, to let them know what's going on. I find this very topic hilarious, given that it was set out by the previous lead dev last year about a plan that doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

SMF 2.1 will most certainly be released.

But, I think I sense a reference to something else in there... On that part, I would ask you to have patience.
You're asking to receive a basket full of cookies at once. There will be news. :)


Thanks :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 17, 2013, 11:19:59 PM
Quote
Like I pointed out: problems cannot be solved if they are not put to attention of the team.

Agreed. Is the team acknowledging that there is a problem? Is the team acknowledging the fact that they have a serious problem with recruiting developers to build software (around which everything is based)?

Are they acknowledging the reasons that have been given to them repeatedly by different iterations of developer team about why they're leaving? (The conversation on Wedge suggests this is not the case.)

Quote
You seem, and please do correct me if I'm wrong, to imply that each and every *potential* problem that could be in SMF has to be known by the team.

SMF or SM organisation? Let us assume the latter, as that is what I was referring to. And refers to my previous point.

Successive generations of developers have left. Each have cited the same core reasons why they have left, with modest variations, but the core reasons remain unchanged. This has been going on for years. I would presume the team are aware of them by now. Either they're choosing to ignore them or playing the blame game.

I would also note that successive people over the years have been blamed as the cause for disturbance and jumped (or pushed) out of the project. And yet miraculously nothing seems to change when they leave.

There is a fundamentally toxic mindset, deep rooted in the organisation behind this project. No-one wants SMF to fail, yet it would appear to be doing so in spite of that. Look back over the last three years. What has remained constant in that time, when the atmosphere was so unpalatable that devs threatened to withdraw their code? (Now, of course, you just have the problem of replacing those people.)

Quote
I do agree whole heartidly that it is sometimes excruciatingly difficult to get something moving around here. No doubt.

Then ask yourself why that is. Big corporations are slow to get things moving, because it takes people to figure something out, then it has to be run by the management, the more senior management, the risk people, the legal people, etc. That is the nature of big business.

SM is not an entity with that infrastructure. It does not have those constraints.

How come, then, that other projects of similar magnitude manage to get things done - when all the contributors are volunteers? What makes SMF different?

Quote
But... That's what happens when you're working with volunteers. People have lives. (At least, some of us *grin*)

Sufficiently motivated people make time for their passions. And there are quite a few sufficiently motivated people in this ecosystem. They just choose not to contribute to SMF itself. Ask yourself why that might be. I have spelled out my reasons. They appear to have consistencies with the reasons others choose not to contribute here.

Quote
I am glad to tell you it's not the correct assumption to make though. It is regrettably indeed an assumption, and it's too bad you think so negative about it. That's up to you, of course. But please, don't make the mistake of seeing that assumption as a immediate fact.

I call it as I see it, for better and for worse, and I'm prepared to justify why I call it that. The comments made by several project representatives do lead me to that feeling, but if you are saying it is incorrect, that's cool. I just want to see some evidence to back it up ;)

Quote
The issue you are referring to was *not* an issue when the NPO was formed, or that is to say: Not in it's current form, it was handled differently at the time. Changes over the years however generated a new problem that was indeed not seen at first sight. And it pretty much isn't an issue anymore now though.

Actually, the issue I'm referring to was an issue at the time the NPO was formed. I will say it again: those people who signed CLAs did not sign over ownership of their code to SM. They signed a licence to allow SM to use it and be credited for it.

The use of CLAs should have prompted someone to talk to a lawyer about copyright and specifically who owns what. If you're going to get picky, technically even before the NPO held copyright it was an issue, since I know I and others signed a CLA for both the LLC and the NPO. But when the NPO took over and updated the copyright statement, that would have been an ideal time to consult a lawyer on the proper course of action. This should have been done prior to 2.0 final in 2011, ideally.

Quote
Just... Patience! (I'd almost add "young Padawan!" to that, but you're near officially OLD. No worries, you don't have to thank me for saying that. )

I'm nearly 30. In internet years that's frickin' ancient.

Quote
Even though indeed, the past is something to learn from and that's a good thing: better the process, better the environment. There have most certainly been some mistakes, some good things mistaken for mistakes and good things in a whole. It just strikes me that people in general usually solely focus on the negative instead of the good and the bad, and that on my part slightly annoys me heh.

From my perspective history just appears to be repeating itself. Different names, but the same general messages.

I'd love to hear what the good bits are.

Quote
Appearances can be deceiving, might I just note that. And you can ask anyone on the team to confirm that if you do not wish to take my word for it.

They can be, but they're the best evidence I have (and it's public, too). Though it is my understanding that there was actually a proposal to formally shelve smCore seeing how there's been no commits in several months. (Github reports 5 months since the last commit.)

Quote
I think that perhaps a whole fresh load of devs might prove to be a different situation than the same people being involved all the time. Fresh winds and bla.

It would be a different problem, certainly. But it would be a smaller problem than not having enough competent devs.

Quote
Duly noted: you, and probably more people, are in need of a status update on 2.1.
Granted, I do not think the developers will have any problems at all divulging that information and I would be very happy if people stepped up to help: it may speed things up!  Help is appreciated and it is what makes it community driven.

Me personally, makes no odds. I can always look at Github for the code. But it would certainly ease my concern over the stewardship of the project to see that someone's actively at the helm.

And yes, if there's some indication of where it's going, people are more likely to pitch in and do something. Even if it's only pitching in to beta test - if it's known that there are no new major features left to implement, you will get more people testing.

Quote
But sure, everyone could be disappointed, but it can go another way as well: sheer happines to be working on a still very much promising project. Past is past, and the past has given valueable lessons.

Only if the past is listened to and acted upon. I see a lot of the same frictions amongst people as I did back in 2010.

Quote
I'll take your word on XenForo, I don't know them.

There's been no release in a year, not even a patch of any kind, and the developers have been near enough inactive on the forum. The Internet Brands/XenForo lawsuit is hotting up, and they're in settlement talks on Wednesday. Whether they come to an agreement or not is neither known or clear. But it is our understanding that the XF team are actually flying out to California in person (previous settlement talks have been over the phone) for Wednesday, and it seems possible that XenForo will close as the result of settlement.

Quote
Well, in regards to SMF 2.1. I guess it's a matter of taste. And perhaps also a reason why you took the road of creating a fork.

I wonder how many people know the story. I also wonder how many people know that had the devs at the time not lied to him, SMF would have successfully recruited both of us for at least a year, if not longer, because he would have persuaded me to step up.

Quote
SMF 2.1 will be offering some splendid new functionality, rewritten parts, patched up current functionality, more in par with "today's world", et cetera. Is it a 100% new product? Nope. Does it *have* to be? Imho: Nope.

That's the thing. It's not on par with 'today's world', or at least it won't be on release. It'll be on par with 'today's world' - tomorrow. That's the unfortunate nature of slow burning development is that you will likely be robust but never up to date. You need to move very fast to keep up with current trends. To an extent it is not entirely a bad thing. But it is something to consider and weigh up very heavily.

Quote
You're free to be disappointed because you had hoped to see far more changes and a 100% new SMF product, but I have a opposite preference: I like SMF sticking to it's root in large lines but DOES take wishes of the community, and of course: self made up new functions, rewrites, etc, in mind with the upcomming SMF 2.1.

I never expected - or wanted - a 100% new product. That is the road to madness since then you have 100% new bugs to fix.

What bothers me is that we're 18 months on, after a 5 year cycle of development, with what might be called a public alpha. There are people legitimately concerned that SMF 2.1 won't come out this year or even the next given the history. This is what history teaches us - once bitten, twice shy and all that.

Quote
(My god, that whole part sounds horribly OMG MARKETING!!1! but it is my sincere personal opinion on the software.)

You wouldn't be doing your job if you weren't :P It's a completely valid point of view too. Keeping stability is important as well as adding new things. But not all forward development is adding new things, remember. It can be important to remove things too.

Quote
I mean, if you look at it that way: SMF 2.x wasn't a super huge change over SMF 1.x either: SMF 2.x also remained true to it's roots set out in SMF 1.x. Did it come with new functionality, a new design, large rewritten parts: Absolutely. But in essence, SMF is still SMF. The same is happening with SMF 2.1. Although, I ofcourse must admit SMF 2.x did have some *major* code differences over 1.x. (That is NOT to say that 2.1 doesn't have that. But, perhaps less than what you personally had hoped for. Which is probably another reason why you chose to make a rewrite of your own.)

When Wedge started, SMF 2.0 was still in RC - shortly before RC4 if memory serves. We set out almost a year before SMF 2.0 went gold. We were genuinely concerned that SMF 2.0 would be the end of the SMF line. We are still concerned that its long term health is not assured. We believe our concerns are well founded. But we'd love to be proven wrong.

Quote
Perhaps it could have been done faster, perhaps it could not have been. We had a few setbacks.
But... SMF 2.1 is getting closer to a release each day that passes. And that is a prime example of what I see as a good thing.

Yes, but what next? I remember full well that 2.1 wasn't even supposed to be developed. It was only ever intended by those who started it in motion as a stop gap, though it has gone beyond that in the intervening months.

This is where a roadmap can be important.

Quote
Yeah, you can certainly argue it's taken it's damn time... But you can also look on the bright side of life (yep, that was a reference.) and focus on happy thoughts: It's getting closer to RC status day by day.

Happy thoughts won't move mountains, only hard work. I have to say, I'm enthused that at least someone cares and is passionate about it, but right now it's talk. Show me something.

The other problem is that we'll never know how many people are thinking the same things I am.

I really want SMF to succeed because I want to see where it goes in the future differently to Wedge, to ElkArte, etc. I want to see where the paths lead, we all started from the same place and we're going in different directions. But as I've said, I can't in good conscience step up too much in terms of contribution to SMF, because it wouldn't be fair to Wedge. But I do occasionally share some of the things I've learned, and it's nice to see some of the things SMF and ElkArte have learned then gets shared with us. There *is* co-operation going on, but it's hard work.

You know me by now. I'm not really one for talking so much. I get down and get my hands dirty with the best of them. I dislike bureaucracy, and meetings and talking about things. Doing them is much more fun, most of the time.

Quote
You're asking to receive a basket full of cookies at once. There will be news.

COOKIE OM NOM NOM NOM

I want to share your optimism, it's infectious. But history taught me that I need to wait to see it before I'll believe the marketing hype.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on February 18, 2013, 08:44:21 AM
******... this is becoming something like a reasonable, sensible conversation between responsible adults!

My brain hurts... ;)

One thing that I'd like to add, Arantor...

This "Transparency" thing is all to the well-and-good.

However, to the vast majority of people, what happens in the ol' team boards and all that stuff, is of little or no interest. They don't give a sh1t, as long as the software does something remotely similar to what they want it to do.

Sure, there are members, such as yourself, Nao and others, who might be curious about it, even if it's from a "Historical" perspective.

But, if I was just a normal member, whatever the Hell "Normal" is, I doubt I'd care, much.

We all, to a member, have different ideas about which direction(s) the future of SMF (The software) takes. As most know, I would've preferred SMF v2 never to have happened and for SMF v1 to have been expanded to include new features, if required, and other stuff.

But, I was probably in a minority of one, there, so SMF v2 came and did it's thang.

But, apart from the direction that the ol' software takes, do many, really, give a stuff about the rest of it?

I'd imagine that the vast majority would find it all tediously boring, to be honest. (https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.katzy.dsl.pipex.com%2FSmileys%2Fc018.gif&hash=a3556647d4a48faa83032d551bdcffb1)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on February 18, 2013, 09:42:02 AM
We all, to a member, have different ideas about which direction(s) the future of SMF (The software) takes. As most know, I would've preferred SMF v2 never to have happened and for SMF v1 to have been expanded to include new features, if required, and other stuff.
I would like to still use Lotus 123...does that make sense?
No.
Does SMF want to produce a software used by many or just by a couple of people on the team?
Sorry, if it sounds harsh, but that's the truth.
And that said, the differences between 1.x and 2.0 are not *that* big in terms of code (proven by the fact that they still share several  bugs). Yes, there are changes, I'm not saying they are exactly the same, though are not *so* different (if 1.1 is win2k, then 2.0 can be the equivalent of winXP).

But, apart from the direction that the ol' software takes, do many, really, give a stuff about the rest of it?
The problem is exactly that.
Make a second account, without team access, take a look around and tell me where you can find any (relevant and up-to-date) information about where the project is going.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on February 18, 2013, 09:44:30 AM
Is that one of the things that the PM should be doing, perhaps?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 18, 2013, 09:46:58 AM
the PM and the marketing group... yup
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on February 18, 2013, 10:05:10 AM
TBH it should not be something born from nowhere and "imposed" on the community, it's not a "procedure", it's something that you have to cultivate, day by day, listen to the community, work with them, make them feel part of the project.
Open development is not just put the repository at github and wait. If you really aim to open development the last thing you have to do is close yourself in the ivory tower and "take decisions".

Unfortunately I always see procedures and delegation (e.g. "it should be the PM") here around, instead of actually stand up and do something.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 18, 2013, 10:18:04 AM
well, you are both right and wrong...

this is not "delegation".   This is something that SHOULD be ongoing and SHOULD be coming from the PM and/or Marketing. After all...   project status and reports is part of the job.  So, it's not delegation... but you are right, the PM should gather the information and then stand up and do it....

Also, I am uncertain what you mean by "imposed" or "procedure" or even "take decisions".
Keeping people informed on the status of the project was always intended to be the job of the PM and Marketing.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 18, 2013, 11:08:32 AM
Quote
One thing that I'd like to add, Arantor...

This "Transparency" thing is all to the well-and-good.

However, to the vast majority of people, what happens in the ol' team boards and all that stuff, is of little or no interest. They don't give a sh1t, as long as the software does something remotely similar to what they want it to do.

Firstly, if there are more transparency (I'm not saying *total* transparency, just *more*), it might make people realise that 1) the team is supposed to be part of the community, not by and large superior to it (my interpretation), 2) the team's self-imposed role is serving the community and 3) that for the project to survive, it needs to talk to the users.

How many people, other than the team, have any real input from the community? The devs have done a fine job but I don't see anywhere that the team invite specific discussion about features with the community. Involve the community. We do it, it really isn't that hard.

Quote
We all, to a member, have different ideas about which direction(s) the future of SMF (The software) takes. As most know, I would've preferred SMF v2 never to have happened and for SMF v1 to have been expanded to include new features, if required, and other stuff.

2.0 is *exactly* what that is. It is 1.1 with lots and lots of extra features. Only one thing could have been called to be 'removed' from 1.1, and that was replaced with something else that serves some sites better than what 1.1 had, and some worse. (I refer to permissions by board vs permission profiles.) But nothing else was actually *removed* from 1.1 in 2.0.

Quote
But, I was probably in a minority of one, there, so SMF v2 came and did it's thang.

But, apart from the direction that the ol' software takes, do many, really, give a stuff about the rest of it?

No, of course they don't. But that's not the point.

The point is, for an organisation that promised openness after so many years of being closed, the openness still appears to be mostly in name only.

No-one wants to contribute to a journey that they don't know where it's going.

Quote
I would like to still use Lotus 123...does that make sense?
No.

Lotus 1-2-3 was awesome in its own way. I miss it.

Quote
Does SMF want to produce a software used by many or just by a couple of people on the team?
Sorry, if it sounds harsh, but that's the truth.

It has seemed to me for a very long time that those who control the project have more say in what happens in the future than those who build it.

Quote
And that said, the differences between 1.x and 2.0 are not *that* big in terms of code (proven by the fact that they still share several  bugs). Yes, there are changes, I'm not saying they are exactly the same, though are not *so* different (if 1.1 is win2k, then 2.0 can be the equivalent of winXP).

Yup. Better explanation than mine, too. 1.1 and 2.0 are not so different.

Quote
The problem is exactly that.
Make a second account, without team access, take a look around and tell me where you can find any (relevant and up-to-date) information about where the project is going.

And we're back to a lack of transparency. The only place you can find anything like that out is by scouring Github, and not everyone wants to start off with that.

Quote
Is that one of the things that the PM should be doing, perhaps?

Quote
the PM and the marketing group... yup

Hmm. This seems wrong somehow.

Quote
TBH it should not be something born from nowhere and "imposed" on the community, it's not a "procedure", it's something that you have to cultivate, day by day, listen to the community, work with them, make them feel part of the project.

And they wonder why they can't recruit and retain developers.

Quote
Open development is not just put the repository at github and wait. If you really aim to open development the last thing you have to do is close yourself in the ivory tower and "take decisions".

Openness by name, closedness by execution.

Quote
Unfortunately I always see procedures and delegation (e.g. "it should be the PM") here around, instead of actually stand up and do something.

I have been accused of causing trouble around here. But this is why I do what I do - because I will not just sit around and do nothing hoping that those who are 'delegated' the authority to act will do so.

Quote
this is not "delegation".   This is something that SHOULD be ongoing and SHOULD be coming from the PM and/or Marketing. After all...   project status and reports is part of the job.  So, it's not delegation... but you are right, the PM should gather the information and then stand up and do it....

Then there is a systemic failure on the part of those groups.

Quote
Also, I am uncertain what you mean by "imposed" or "procedure" or even "take decisions".
Keeping people informed on the status of the project was always intended to be the job of the PM and Marketing.

So please explain to me why we haven't seen anything from these people in months? The last update I can find from a non dev is in this board and dates from September 2012. Everything else has come from the devs themselves.

If these people are supposed to do a job, bloody well get on and do it. If not, don't interfere with those who are, i.e. the devs.

Btw, you should see Norv's dismantling of the copyright mess on ElkArte. That's some serious reading - and I thought I had a chip on my shoulder about SMF's mishandling of things.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 18, 2013, 11:25:20 AM
Quote
It has seemed to me for a very long time that those who control the project have more say in what happens in the future than those who build it.

Complete and total BS, Arantor.   We had this dicussion elsewhere, and you keep harping on this, veen though you are STILL, as pointed out before, mistaken..
No one on ANY team has ever tried to tell the developers what to code or how to code it.
The **ONLY** "interference" in supposed development "powers" came over the approval to actually MAKE a release. The dev team has always had total control over what happens in the future of the project, despite mine and other's best efforts to try and get them to accept input from the other team members (and I will note here, emanuele and spuds DID take input for 2.1, so this is not directed at them at all).



As for Norv, I've heard from others and, as far as I can tell, she is has become delusional. Given her past attitude and actions, I have no respect left for her... and that's all I'll say on the matter.


As for doing the job...   Yes. they need to get on with it. And for the last bloody, f'ing time... no one is interfering with the devs.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 18, 2013, 11:34:52 AM
Quote
Complete and total BS, Arantor.   We had this dicussion elsewhere, and you keep harping on this, veen though you are STILL, as pointed out before, mistaken..

Actually, I'm not. Go read Norv's commentary on the copyright, maybe you'll understand. But I doubt it.

Quote
The dev team has always had total control over what happens in the future of the project, despite mine and other's best efforts to try and get them to accept input from the other team members (and I will note here, emanuele and spuds DID take input for 2.1, so this is not directed at them at all).

So in the first sentence you say that no-one has ever tried to tell the developers what to do. And in the second sentence you say that you had to get them to do something. Make your mind up.

Quote
As for Norv, I've heard from others and, as far as I can tell, she is has become delusional. Given her past attitude and actions, I have no respect left for her... and that's all I'll say on the matter.

I disagree. In particular I would encourage anyone to read http://www.elkarte.net/index.php?topic=162.msg1272#msg1272

Quote
As for doing the job...   Yes. they need to get on with it. And for the last bloody, f'ing time... no one is interfering with the devs.

You're so, so wrong with that statement.

I look at what Wedge and Elkarte are doing and I cannot conceive in my wildest imagination that SMF would ever do any of the things that either project are doing. Not 'that they would do' but things they are doing.

For example, I know full well that if I'd ever suggested the plans I had for Wedge's plugin manager for SMF, you would have shot them down out of hand, as you have even on Wedge's own forum. Never mind the arguments I presented for its defence, never mind the hassle it would save, but it limits flexibility and so you'd shout it down if it were to be suggested here.

Is that not interference? Would that not be curtailing what I as a developer feel is appropriate to be added to the base software?

Not all interference is blatant. Not all of it is public or even semi public. The fact that you're still denying it means you've convinced yourself it isn't happening, even when successive groups of people are all saying the same thing.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 18, 2013, 12:17:12 PM
no..  you have misread.
Quote
Quote
The dev team has always had total control over what happens in the future of the project, despite mine and other's best efforts to try and get them to accept input from the other team members (and I will note here, emanuele and spuds DID take input for 2.1, so this is not directed at them at all).
So in the first sentence you say that no-one has ever tried to tell the developers what to do. And in the second sentence you say that you had to get them to do something. Make your mind up.
I said that we have TRIED to get devs to accept input. That is different from telling them what to do.

I skimmed that crap from Norv. I understand what she is trying to say, but I disagree and I still say that she is full of it.
And regardless of what Norv claims, no one has ever told the devs what to code or how to code it. EVER!

Finally, I did not shout down your plugin deisgn.
I commented that I feel that SMF's deisgn to allow editing of source files is one of the things that makes it more powerful than a straight forward plugin. I think that plugin designs are useful, especially for the generic user... I think that the SMF package manager should exourage plugin but support both.   However, I never shouted your concept down and my comments are expressing my considered and expereinced position.

And this is the attitude that bothers me.
You say "devs should consider and accept input form the community members"
then you turn around and berate me for saying "devs should accept input from the team members"

So, what you are really saying is "Devs should be the king of all they survey. They should be able to do anything they want, without consideration to anyone else and they basically are the only ones that matter, ever."

That's the attitude that hurts when you have a mature product that has a much wider team than just "the developers".

Wedge and Elkarte can do that, because they are not actually a real product yet.
They have no distribution (outside of some testing) they have no community to support and no need for a team to distribute, document and support the product. Anything you have in the way of community, actually, is "borrowed" from SMF due to the fact that both projects are offshoots.  If you were coding from scratch, I don't think you'd have more than a few members for curiosity and testing.
This is not to denigrate anything you have done. I've looked at wedge. It's cool. You and Nao have done an amazing job.
Your entire community is piggybacking on the previous and current success of SMF, though.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 18, 2013, 12:39:02 PM
Quote
I did not shout down your plugin deisgn.
I commented that I feel that SMF's deisgn to allow editing of source files is one of the things that makes it more powerful than a straight forward plugin. I think that plugin designs are useful, especially for the generic user... I think that the SMF package manager should exourage plugin but support both.   However, I never shouted your concept down and my comments are expressing my considered and expereinced position.

Actually, you did. I put forward all of my points - and there's even more that you didn't even consider, like security - and that was all dismissed because it's not as flexible as SMF, and no amount of persuasion would have changed that fact. Had I tried to implement it in SMF, you'd have screamed about it.

Quote
And this is the attitude that bothers me.
You say "devs should consider and accept input form the community members"
then you turn around and berate me for saying "devs should accept input from the team members"

Correct. The fact you don't understand what's wrong with this is one of the key points of what's wrong with SMF.

Why are team members more special than community members? Are they more special than community members? If so, why?

More importantly, why should devs 'accept' input from team members? They should consider it, but no more or less than any other community member. This is the part that a lot of team members have trouble with.

We're the ones at the rock face, not you. If you're going to 'suggest' something, either do it at the same level as everyone else, or get down and dirty and pitch in. This is where it's gone wrong: the team feel they are better than regular community members at knowing the direction of the software - and that's wrong.

Go take a look at Wedge and what we do. We involve the community. We suggest things and get the community's take on it. We are not just the leaders of the community, we're *part* of the community. Something the team here generally cannot stand up and say. Some members can, yes. But the majority cannot legitimately make that claim.

Quote
So, what you are really saying is "Devs should be the king of all they sruvey. They should be able to do anything they want, without consideration to anyone else and they basically are the only ones that matter, ever."

That's the attitude that hurts when you have a mature product that has a much wider team than just "the developers".

In a community built around a piece of software, that's not entirely an unfair statement.

Here's the $64,000 question. WHY does it hurt? You didn't build it. You don't own it. Why do you have attachments of emotional value to something you didn't build?

But it's also a biased statement from someone who cannot see it from our point of view. We do try to consider everyone else. The fact anything gets built at all is proof of that small fact.

Quote
Wedge and Elkarte can do that, because they are not actually a real product yet.

You have a funny definition of 'real product'. We've released alphas that are installable. That qualifies as a 'real product'. It also shows your arrogance a little.

Quote
They have no distribution (outside of some testing) they have no community to support and no need for a team to distribute, document and support the product. Anything you have in the way of community, actually, is "borrowed" from SMF due to the fact that both projects are offshoots.

Oh, enough of the snooty down the nose already.

Quote
This is not to denigrate anything you have done. I've looked at wedge. It's cool. You and Nao have done an amazing job.

Please do not mistake me for a fool. The previous statements fairly clearly indicate that you consider us both to be toy projects, whether you want to admit it or not.

Both projects have made more progress since their inceptions than SMF has in the same time. What does that tell you?

Quote
Your entire community is piggybacking on the previous and current success of SMF, though.

Previous, yes. Current? No. It's growing because of the *lack* of current SMF success and apparent stagnation of the project.


I would carry on arguing but I appear to be the only one who actually cares enough to fight the good fight. Everyone else relevant in this matter already moved on, because they've already given up on SMF's future. I'm one of the few people who was involved but who cares enough to spend any effort on hashing this stuff out. But I feel like I'm wasting my time because the people who need to change aren't listening and are being drowned out by people who think they're acting for the best but really making it worse.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on February 18, 2013, 12:50:20 PM
The transparency thing is something that we're all gonna have different ideas about, innit?

I'm afraid that I can only see that from the side of the fence that I'm sitting on and it's not something that's ever bothered me, to be honest.

As long as people say exactly what they're thinking, I'm OK with things. As long as people read things in the way that the poster meant them to be read, everything would be fine, really. Pity we can't do that, very well, coz certain nuances are always gonna be missing.

Tiz a shame, coz I feel that a good proportion of the brown stuff that's hit the ol' whirly thing, over the years, could've been avoided.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 18, 2013, 12:59:43 PM
Arantor, I no way was my post meant to be snooty and you, clearly, alreayd decided what I was saying without actually considering it.   Way to slant what typed into something that I didn't actually say.

I don't consider you a "toy" project. I do consider wedge to be a kick-off project that has no large community or need for a lrage amount of community support.
and "real product" means that, yes, you have an alpha... but it was a limited release to a select few. You do not have widespread distribution and you do not have a need to support thousands of people using your software.

You DO NOT try to "consider everyone else" (you, being devs in general, not you specifically).
Based on what you have said, you (and this is the direct you)actually believe that the team members should have **LESS** input than the community.

As for why devs should accept input from team members? Well maybe because we're all on the same team and all have invested ALOT into SMF. With the exception of you... I would guess that I have probably put as much time into providing support and other "background" stuff for SMF as any developer has spent on coding, in recent years (unknown and the other early developers are excluded in that comparison).  You're right... I didn't code anything. That's why I don't tell the developers how to code. However, even if the team does not actually put code in, the devs should accept input form them, since we're all a team and the others are the ones who have to support and document what the devs code. :) Also, those who make it onto the team have established that they have a fair amount of experience with SMF and probably have some good input.
(note: nowhere did I say that the devs have to DO what the team says, I said that they should accept INPUT from the team)
This is where you (and the others) seem to have a falling down stroke and blind-spot. input != command.

finally
Quote
Both projects have made more progress since their inceptions than SMF has in the same time. What does that tell you?
It tells me that they are being coded by folks who don't have to consider the larger picture. Who don't have to support several thousand existing users.   You can definitely get a lot done that way... until suddenly you make a full release and are more busy providing support than you are coding. (much of the time that you spent coding wedge, you also spent AWAY from here... not a criticism, just an observation)
Norv tried to do the same with SMC... (and I will note, there was **NO** "interference" from anyone with whatever the hell they thought they were doing over there) and then she flaked, Guess she's just not as dedicated as you. :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on February 18, 2013, 01:05:04 PM
Quote
but I appear to be the only one who actually cares enough to fight the good fight

I'm still around but every time I open my mouth, everyone else puts on the "oh no, she again... more drama" chip before actually listen to my words.  Besides, all the things said here has already been told elsewhere, it is so damn easy to attract new devs or at least show signs of movement... how many time has passed since the license change and 90% of the PHP community out there still doesn't know that SMF is now a truly open source software... unbelievable...

Do I still care, yes I do.
Does it hurt to see absolutely no signs of movement here? yes it does. The only "changes" I saw so far is Joshua been a dev now and the "open source" title next to the "Simple Machines Forum - Free" text in the <title> HTML tag. both of them are just cosmetic changes since Joshua has always been involved with development even though he only pops out from time to time.

As a plain mortal with no team access, I have no idea what are the plans for future SMF development. I have plans to take a look and re-factor the dump database feature but how am I suppose to start with it if I have absolutely no idea on whats next after 2.1?

I still has the (now vague) idea on refactoring the modsite here but how can I even suggest things when the team just sits there on their shell just waiting for stuff to happen?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on February 18, 2013, 02:05:13 PM
I'm glad to see this discussion going, shows me and the public interest in the thoughts and consideration of the folks here, to me it a good thing. Civil discussion, and although some things I know need to be kept between the Dev's and team, that thoughts and ideas are being shared with the public. I feel there maybe some miss understandings here but all seems to be on the right trail.
To me I was raised with the idea that the Job is number one before the family, because with no job, you can not support your family (you guys).

Here it would appear the User is the Job and the Family is the Admins/Dev's/Team and although they are very close in relevance, without user's you have no Family or purpose, so the User's opinions/desires, should be considered at least in the mix. I know know you can not please everyone at all and in allot of cases, but they must be considered.

Not to belittle the Dev's and Team, the final decision should be/is yours to make.

There are many using SMF, and will continue to do so, so that means it's up to you all to get together and move forward, and there is no question my mined that there is a need for SMF and I keep repeating myself, but I have yet to find anything better thus far.. I would suggest that it be only moved toward completion with the newer web related requirements and the same security concerns as before and, ask the user's what they think, not the mod makers and the theme creators, but rather the User, for a while and see what comes up, I think most all you know what the other wants, so i would recommend not getting stuck on that, just for a while!

I like and I have said it before the 2.1 Alpha... and I'm sure what ever you guys get together on and make the, plug-in , mod or add-on or what ever can be dealt with, I'm 64 years old and I'm learning new stuff all the time.

Hope this helps! if I should shut up just let me know!

regards,
Maxx

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 18, 2013, 02:22:06 PM
Quote
I don't consider you a "toy" project. I do consider wedge to be a kick-off project that has no large community or need for a lrage amount of community support.
and "real product" means that, yes, you have an alpha... but it was a limited release to a select few. You do not have widespread distribution and you do not have a need to support thousands of people using your software.

It doesn't change the fact it's still a real product. Just because it's not in public release doesn't change that fact.

Quote
You DO NOT try to "consider everyone else" (you, being devs in general, not you specifically).
Based on what you have said, you (and this is the direct you)actually believe that the team members should have **LESS** input than the community.

Oh you're good at wilfully misinterpreting, aren't you?

That isn't what I said. I believe the team should have an equal footing to the community. Not more, not less. They're part of the community. They're not this separate entity from it, unlike the current SMF model.

We're all part of this 'community'. What makes your say any more important than a newly registered member?

The only thing that gives *me* any say about it is when I get down and chip away at the rock face. Until that happens, I have no more say than anyone else. That's what being a member of the community means.

Quote
As for why devs should accept input from team members? Well maybe because we're all on the same team and all have invested ALOT into SMF. With the exception of you... I would guess that I have probably put as much time into providing support and other "background" stuff for SMF as any developer has spent on coding, in recent years (unknown and the other early developers are excluded in that comparison).  You're right... I didn't code anything.

So you've invested a lot of time. That's hugely commendable. But does it give you the right to claim you have more say than someone who just started using the software?

Does it have an adverse effect where you're so used to it that you'll discourage change of any fashion because it's worked well thus far and so presumably doesn't need change?

Supporting a project is admirable, hugely so, and it's important - and don't let me encourage thoughts to the contrary. However, why is someone who has made a huge investment of time and energy more important to the project than someone who hasn't (yet, but might do so)?

More importantly, why is their opinion more significant?

Quote
That's why I don't tell the developers how to code. However, even if the team does not actually put code in, the devs should accept input form them, since we're all a team and the others are the ones who have to support and document what the devs code.

Be careful with your words. You might not have told them how to code something. But you may have had an influence with how it should function - which isn't always in code terms. Similarly, you might have set out that things need to be done (or not done), which is influencing what is done if not how it is done.

Some of this is for the greater good, and yes, developers will often have to do things that are sucky to get the good stuff done. That's the nature of that particular beast. However, I have seen cases of ideas being shot down because they are not necessarily in line with the 'original vision' of SMF.

For example, a portal. I really can see the necessity of a portal becoming a core feature in the next few years, if not sooner. The world - and the web - is changing. Forums are harder to start running these days. But SMF is 'just a forum'. All the time it is just a forum, it's going to sink. There will be a change in the next few years too away from social networking as it stands, and forums might benefit, but those best placed to do so are the ones that offer more than just forum functionality. Even IPS is making IP.Board a *non core feature* going forward. Yup, that's right, IPB won't have a forum by default, it will be an add-on to the core.

It's like calling things unconstitutional because of some perceived bias, but society is not the same society it was 200 years ago.

Quote
This is where you (and the others) seem to have a falling down stroke and blind-spot. input != command.

Except I, and the others, are the ones who are on the receiving end of it. We're the ones at the rock face. And ultimately if you want us to build things, it's going to be on our terms. Not adhering to that caveat is what is costing SMF so dearly.

We build things in a certain way. We should be involving the community in discussion of features. But end of the day we're the ones building it. You can't force us to accept input. If we don't want your input, that's our call, not yours to make.

For example, say there's a security issue. Are we (developers) going to involve you (non developers) in discussion of how that security feature should be resolved? Unless it impacts on other things, the answer should be no. This same practice should really hold true for everything else.

Take today. I just implemented a new feature in Wedge to avoid language edits touching the language files. Did I consult anyone about it? Did I ask for input? Yes - on a minor side issue, which in hindsight wasn't even an issue. I assessed the needs, and I came up with a solution that addresses the needs I perceive - and I don't need anyone else telling me what is required, nor do I need anyone telling me that it isn't necessary because what is there is 'good enough'. (Clearly it isn't, otherwise I wouldn't have thought to do what I did.)

But I didn't open it up to the community for discussion for the most part. It didn't warrant it. I certainly didn't invite technical discussion on implementation (though I have raised one issue with Nao for his take because it impacts something else he's working on)... and I'm fine with that. I relied on my judgement.

If you feel you have to coerce someone into taking input, you're probably doing it wrong. (And I'm well aware that holds true for me too.)

Quote
You can definitely get a lot done that way... until suddenly you make a full release and are more busy providing support than you are coding. (much of the time that you spent coding wedge, you also spent AWAY from here... not a criticism, just an observation)

What does that have to do with anything? It just meant I changed how I decided to use my free time. I'm not just some resource that can be exploited. Nor are any other volunteer developers.

I would also note that I remain here, offering support, because it serves my needs to do so. The fact it also serves SMF's needs is a side matter.



Quote
I'm still around but every time I open my mouth, everyone else puts on the "oh no, her again... more drama" chip before actually listen to my words.

I try to listen to your words before I come to a decision about how to reply. I do think I don't communicate myself properly sometimes.

Quote
Besides, all the things said here has already been told elsewhere, it is so damn easy to attract new devs or at least show signs of movement... how many time has passed since the license change and 90% of the PHP community out there still doesn't know that SMF is now a truly open source software... unbelievable...

It has been 20 months since the licence change. Most of the wider community doesn't care anyway. SMF is considered very much a second class citizen in even in the forum world, licence changes notwithstanding.

Quote
Do I still care, yes I do.

There are a lot of people who care. My comment, somewhat flippant, was more that I feel like I'm the only one outwards trying to fight this battle because everyone else (whether they care or not) has accepted defeat and put it behind them.

Quote
Does it hurt to see absolutely no signs of movement here? yes it does. The only "changes" I saw so far is Joshua been a dev now and the "open source" title next to the "Simple Machines Forum - Free" text in the <title> HTML tag. both of them are just cosmetic changes since Joshua has always been involved with development even though he only pops out from time to time.

I won't even get into some of the comments I could make.

Quote
As a plain mortal with no team access, I have no idea what are the plans for future SMF development.

Bingo!

Quote
I have plans to take a look and re-factor the dump database feature but how am I suppose to start with it if I have absolutely no idea on whats next after 2.1?

How do you and I know that 2.1 won't yet include a major change that affects what you're doing?

Quote
I still has the (now vague) idea on refactoring the modsite here but how can I even suggest things when the team just sits there on their shell just waiting for stuff to happen?

There is an interesting analogy to be made there. It is, then, an exercise for the reader.



Quote
There are many using SMF, and will continue to do so, so that means it's up to you all to get together and move forward

I do not ever see that happening. All of the major contributors have fled to other projects.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: PhuriousGeorge on February 18, 2013, 05:59:22 PM
But, apart from the direction that the ol' software takes, do many, really, give a stuff about the rest of it?
The problem is exactly that.
Make a second account, without team access, take a look around and tell me where you can find any (relevant and up-to-date) information about where the project is going.

I haven't gotten through the entire thread yet, but I felt I had to at least cheer you for this! I'm a recent convert to SMF and I'll be completely and say I was and still am concerened, but morecurious about where this team/project/corp is going.

Now I did a ton of research on *free* forum software and with the time invested, I decided to go with SMF based on stability. That being said, I had to dig quite a bit at many different sites to gett a good feeling about the software because from what I could see from the access given within this site, I have no idea what's going on. I then joined the Charter group for various reasons, one of them, hoping for a bit more insight to what's going on. I haven't had the chance to thouroughly check the Charter forum, but from initial impressions, there wasn't much, if any, additional news/insight there.

I realize that my forum is tiny compared to most, and I'm a small fish here, but I still have to go through most of the ropes a big board does in utilizing, configuring, tweaking & modding the software and would love to hear the plans, get excited, and possibly do what I can to help. I'm sure there's similar people out there as well.

TL;DR: You're spot-on emanuele. Overall, from what I've seen, there hasn't been any significant news/content regarding the software on these fourms and things seem a bit 'stale', which doesn't tend to generate excitement/attract new users/potential contributors.

EDIT: THANK GOODESS the captcha's gone. Omg that was a pain!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 18, 2013, 06:04:18 PM
Quote
I haven't had the chance to thouroughly check the Charter forum, but from initial impressions, there wasn't much, if any, additional news/insight there.

That has largely been the case for a long time, as a more thorough examination of the board would indicate.

Quote
would love to hear the plans, get excited, and possibly do what I can to help. I'm sure there's similar people out there as well.

I'm in a similar boat, even if I am in a funny position.

Quote
TL;DR: You're spot-on emanuele. Overall, from what I've seen, there hasn't been any significant news/content regarding the software on these fourms and things seem a bit 'stale', which doesn't tend to generate excitement/attract new users/potential contributors

And he's on the dev team, one of the people at the rock face.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: PhuriousGeorge on February 18, 2013, 06:34:02 PM
Quote
TL;DR: You're spot-on emanuele. Overall, from what I've seen, there hasn't been any significant news/content regarding the software on these fourms and things seem a bit 'stale', which doesn't tend to generate excitement/attract new users/potential contributors

And he's on the dev team, one of the people at the rock face.

Not sure the intent of this comment.

That being said, do I think emanuele, as a volunteer dev for this project 'owes' me insight into what he's doing, where he's going no, not exactly. I think that's what the team backing him & his fellows is there for.

I'm challenged with this myslef. While my forum userbase is tiny, the project(s) they support have had significant numbers of people. I, as the admin/dev/tester/customer support/etc have a really hard time communicating things and getting things done at the same time along with being a father and work. Just had an occurrance this weekend and I need to attempt to reconcile that once I return home (amazingly work doesn't block this site!). Again, as others have said in other words, I don't think any one person is at fault, it's an overall 'attitude' of the project that carries on to it's core assets.

To add to my previous post regarding initial impressions, again, cheers to emanuele and Labradoodle-360 for their quick assistance to a php noob like myself. I was very impressed by the assistance and dilligence in helping even a tiny board.

(I think that should be a new usergroup lol, screw 'big board' haha)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 18, 2013, 06:38:58 PM
Quote
Not sure the intent of this comment.

The intent is that if the *developers* are saying there's a problem... there's a huge problem.

Quote
I think that's what the team backing him & his fellows is there for.

Yup. This is one of the many issues that is boiling over. As can be seen, the team appears to consider the non-devs on the team about as important as the developers (and more important than the wider community in general), but they're not the ones apparently doing anything.

Quote
I don't think any one person is at fault, it's an overall 'attitude' of the project that carries on to it's core assets.

Oh, definitely. One of the underlying problems is that every year to 18 months, someone is the 'bad person' behind the scenes, a troublemaker and causer of drama. That person leaves, or is pushed, and the cycle continues because the core problems never get fixed. It's been that way since before the time I was on the team and continued after I left (yes, I was one of the people branded a problem back in the day)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on February 18, 2013, 07:25:30 PM
There will be a change in the next few years too away from social networking as it stands, and forums might benefit, ...

Interesting comment. Why do you think this will happen?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on February 18, 2013, 07:32:06 PM
Partly because Facebook et al is always a bit of a fad - like MySpace before it (and yes I know they're trying to 'reinvent themselves'), partly because I think there's going to come a point where people are going to get fed up of their privacy being eroded.

Here, I'm just some guy. My real name and age aren't hard to find but it's not everywhere.

I think as people get more aware of digital privacy, they're going to move away from one-size-fits-all places like Facebook.

As places to waste a bit of time and share news and even photos and so on with friends and family, it's a valid place. But for anything in a niche, no chance, that's where forums have always been strong, doubly so if the forum can provide facilities that Facebook et al can't.

Also note that stories like http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/05/pew_facebook_churn_story/ are becoming more and more common.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on February 18, 2013, 07:54:53 PM
+1, the Internet and social nets give people an impression they are safe and away from any harm, when predators of all kinds are lurking to harm someone in anyway they can, not to mention how many lost their careers over this stuff, losing ids, and and even people seeking revenge and doing others harm over a word or misunderstanding.
It was a great way advertising to those who love to play, but for me the Internet was always A tool and not meant to be a toy.

Forums are way more focused on Topics of interest! and that's a good thing. Your private life and everyone Else's this is just that Private.

And I heard this on the internet LOL!

regards,
maxx

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on February 18, 2013, 07:55:44 PM
I think as people get more aware of digital privacy, they're going to move away from one-size-fits-all places like Facebook.

A family friend recently visited my mother and pleaded that we all get on Facebook to keep in touch. I had avoided it like the plague for years because of the identity thing, but I got sucked into it by the prevailing tidal forces.

To me it's way to gimmicky and has way too many bells and whistles staring you in the face. When I first signed up I was getting notice messages and emails out the a** every time somebody said something. I had to turn off a ton of notices, there are so many ways to get notified I'm still not sure I am comfortable with it all.

Also, I don't like a system where there are only "likes". There are no "dislikes". I don't approve of the type of environment where everybody only gets approvals - everybody gets a medal and an award artificial feel-good environment. Ick.

That reminds me, I need to go to my forum right now and smite somebody ...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on February 18, 2013, 08:34:09 PM
[off-topic]

Just took a quick look at your site, for the hell* of it.

Anyway about links (http://www.atheistthinktank.net/thinktank/index.php?topic=10210.0)............I always do them by dropping the url tags into the post first, then backspace one space, drop in the = and the url, then forward space one and drop in the text I want.

Less convoluted (IMO) than the process described in that thread.

[/off-topic]


*metaphorical usage of term that strictly describes non-existent place
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on February 18, 2013, 08:42:31 PM
[off-topic]

Just took a quick look at your site, for the hell* of it.

 ;)

Quote
Anyway about links (http://www.atheistthinktank.net/thinktank/index.php?topic=10210.0)............I always do them by dropping the url tags into the post first, then backspace one space, drop in the = and the url, then forward space one and drop in the text I want.

Less convoluted (IMO) than the process described in that thread.

OK, I'll point her to your advice. Thanks.

[/off-topic]
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Biology Forums on March 30, 2013, 01:39:04 PM
I'd like to see a built-in blog and gallery.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 30, 2013, 01:41:58 PM
Question: given your reluctance to move to SMF 2.0, let alone anything else, would it really be enough to entice you when SMF 1.1.x eventually goes end-of-life (which it will sooner or later)

Realistically I don't see it happening because SMF has always maintained its view that it is 'a forum and nothing but a forum'.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on March 30, 2013, 04:40:35 PM
Personally, I'd hate to see such bloat, in the core product.

An "Official" addon, perhaps. But, not in the core installation.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Biology Forums on March 30, 2013, 05:41:21 PM
Personally, I'd hate to see such bloat, in the core product.

An "Official" addon, perhaps. But, not in the core installation.

Yes, or an official add-on of some sort by the SMF team.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Herman's Mixen on March 30, 2013, 05:46:08 PM
Don't see that com ming as Kevin's MyIbPortal was back in the "old" day's anouncent as an offical-addon and never came out of the box.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on March 30, 2013, 05:47:17 PM
The way I see it, which may differ from most others, is that SMF should be lean and mean.

If I had the skills to be a developer, I'd make that basic install as small and as lean as I could. But, with that initial install, I'd have a "Question and answer" section.

"Do you want xxx installed?"

"Do you want yyy installed?"

If they want 'em, they get installed, with the forum. If they don't, they won't".

Obviously, there can't be too many options, or it'd just get too unwieldy.

Sadly, I don't have those skills. Nothing even approaching them. :(
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 30, 2013, 05:49:19 PM
I don't see it happening. Such a thing would have to be written from scratch since none of the gallery authors are going to contribute their code to the project. I'm not sure what state the blog addons are in but I doubt that their authors will contribute them either. Both of these are huge undertakings.


Quote
Obviously, there can't be too many options, or it'd just get too unwieldy.

That and a vast network of security, practicality and maintenance issues. And the people who go 'Where's my gallery' when they didn't tick for it to be installed in the first place.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Herman's Mixen on March 30, 2013, 05:51:54 PM
I'll just breaking stuff out of my install, just the things i dont need... i will break some stuff but can fix it ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on March 30, 2013, 05:52:35 PM
There are far too many idiots around, to make things idiot-proof, sadly.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on March 31, 2013, 10:50:35 AM
Well @ the Blog, they are nice to have and the top used is WP at about 7% of the net usage, however the social sites are becoming more and more ( In my view) un secure and open for more hacks/ attacks and spam, than the from type software, In my eyes the Forums are more versatile and yet controllable than the Blog thing. Not saying I don't like Blogs, they  seem more SEO comparable, but you can only do so much with them. There is only so much can be done with the Blog thing, but combining things, now that is an idea. ( for me the Blog is more personal or limited subject related system, than the Forums> again Nothing matches the SMF and or the Wedge ass ar as I can tell and I test most all, Eve the Vboard, admin d a few sites of this flavor

Now I'm on both side of the fence and I love SMF and I also Like very much what the WEDGE is working toward and just just seems a shame to me that they both can not come together in some way to make a Kick ass system, that does it all. Aeva is already there, not sure what it's direct is , but I use it and it's nice so the gallery part is there! ( and the Guys at Wedge are keeping us up to date, in the transparent way!) :)

To me I see many possibilities both here and at the Wedge... there is plenty going on in the right direction, although SMF seems to be stuck some how, I just wish things could get together and move forward with the SMF and with the Wedge. Wishful thinking I guess!

regards,
Maxx





Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 10:53:49 AM
Quote
I just wish things could get together and move forward with the SMF and with the Wedge. Wishful thinking I guess!

I can tell you right now that the circumstances will never allow this to happen.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on March 31, 2013, 11:07:57 AM
Yes Friend I know!

regards,
Maxx
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 11:09:31 AM
It was more for the benefit of everyone else. I can guarantee right now that what Wedge is doing is just not compatible with SMF's direction and goals.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on March 31, 2013, 11:23:04 AM
I guess I should have worded things different, but I just wanted SMF to be moving like the Wedge is :}

I know your coding is not the same and you goal as well!

regards,
maxx
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on March 31, 2013, 11:33:21 AM
What more can be done to SMF though? It's a forum and it does what it does as well as I can imagine.

People post topics, and others respond.

What more is there really, other than added features?

Like a handheld hammer, it's pretty much as good as it's ever going to get. It hammers nails. If you want to add laser sights or titanium hammerhead or special reflective paint or things like that, that's fine, but its function is what it is.

I'm not complaining at all, and I'm not asking for more here, but at some point isn't a thing as good as it's going to get, or at least 98% as good as it will ever be, for what it was designed for?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 11:44:21 AM
There are a great many enhancements that can be applied, in fact, and most of them very subtle - but potentially very important.

Off the top of my head, things that could improve SMF:
* proper timezone support, meaning weekends where daylight savings changes just wouldn't be an issue
* better mod support, without mods having to make file edits
* ability to edit email templates in the core
* not having most of the user preferences as 'theme options'

There are a surprising number of its features designed by programmers, seemingly for programmers and a decade of real use shows that those choices were not necessarily always the best.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on March 31, 2013, 11:47:12 AM
That's a perfectly working car:
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F1%2F1e%2FBenz-velo.jpg%2F300px-Benz-velo.jpg&hash=1899efd64d4f33a2aaf3c814221bdace) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Velo)

That is a quite good one too:
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F2%2F2d%2FOpel_Insignia_front_20100516.jpg%2F220px-Opel_Insignia_front_20100516.jpg&hash=c7abc9e3c07070b70d3dc7a63425b58e)

but, heck that one is very nice too:
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F0%2F09%2FHonda_NSX_red.jpg%2F220px-Honda_NSX_red.jpg&hash=4db3f0ed7d10723788c61bced0d86efa)

Would have enough money that one could be an option too:
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F2%2F24%2FLamborghini_Gallardo_silver.jpg%2F220px-Lamborghini_Gallardo_silver.jpg&hash=3faa57b6734062c739c230f82e6c6e43)

But why not:
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fc1%2F2011_Nissan_Leaf_WAS_2011_1040.JPG%2F300px-2011_Nissan_Leaf_WAS_2011_1040.JPG&hash=6167e79244321467573f3b8fa8d896bc) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_fuel_vehicle#Battery-electric)

or

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F6%2F65%2FHands-free_Driving.jpg%2F300px-Hands-free_Driving.jpg&hash=937f8785c7f18915f687db36eae4dbd6) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car)

There is always space for improvement or alternatives. No matter what.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 11:48:13 AM
Eh, give me a DeLorean any time. ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on March 31, 2013, 12:00:30 PM
That's a perfectly working car:
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F1%2F1e%2FBenz-velo.jpg%2F300px-Benz-velo.jpg&hash=1899efd64d4f33a2aaf3c814221bdace) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Velo)

Yes, and that's how SMF may have been at first. Did I say it hasn't been improved emanuele?

No.

I clearly stated I thought it had been improved to this point -

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F2%2F24%2FLamborghini_Gallardo_silver.jpg%2F220px-Lamborghini_Gallardo_silver.jpg&hash=3faa57b6734062c739c230f82e6c6e43)

But both cars do the same thing - they go from point A to point B. that's what they are made for. The second car does it better than the first in lots of ways, and that's exactly my point emanuele. SMF is at the stage of the second car. People post topics and respond as well as I can imagine. How does that get better from this point? How does the base function of the forum get better? Don't just post pictures, explain how posting and responding to topics gets better from the current state of the SMF forum software.

That's what I want to know.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 12:05:52 PM
Quote
How does the base function of the forum get better? Don't just post pictures, explain how posting and responding to topics gets better from the current state of the SMF forum software.

Funnily enough I gave you several things. There are many more things that can be done on top of that. To add to my previous list:

* ability to reorder custom fields, as well as adding them to the member list
* ability to configure displaying of multiple badges
* ability to filter out posts containing inappropriate content, either automatically moderating them or even automatically preventing them being posted

There's also various mods whose functionality would be well served in the core, e.g. setting up automatically locking old topics, better handling of mass moves.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on March 31, 2013, 12:11:46 PM
Quote
How does the base function of the forum get better? Don't just post pictures, explain how posting and responding to topics gets better from the current state of the SMF forum software.

Funnily enough I gave you several things. There are many more things that can be done on top of that. To add to my previous list:

* ability to reorder custom fields, as well as adding them to the member list
* ability to configure displaying of multiple badges
* ability to filter out posts containing inappropriate content, either automatically moderating them or even automatically preventing them being posted

There's also various mods whose functionality would be well served in the core, e.g. setting up automatically locking old topics, better handling of mass moves.

OK.

That's great. remember I'm not complaining I'm simply asking questions. But sometimes people have asked for improvements and I've seen them get shot down because somebody else says "That's fluff!" "That's an unneeded feature!" "SMF needs to stick to it's purpose and not get bloated!"

Getting back to the car analogy - one man's backup camera is another man's bloated car accessory.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 12:14:22 PM
And that's true to a point. But you can argue by the exact same token that custom fields are unnecessary, that multiple badges are unnecessary, that even things like censoring words is unnecessary.

I personally think if it's a feature that can be argued to have benefit to a decent proportion of the userbase, without a significant performance hit, it's probably not bloat.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on March 31, 2013, 12:21:18 PM
Well, if you just need posts and **nothing** else...then you would be fine even with SMF 1.0.
But xrunner, I'm not here to convince you there is any need for features or things, I just wanted to say there is space for improvement even in the basic user experience of "post and answer" (there is, believe me).
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 12:25:20 PM
/me press the like button.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on March 31, 2013, 12:28:06 PM
And that's true to a point. But you can argue by the exact same token that custom fields are unnecessary, that multiple badges are unnecessary, that even things like censoring words is unnecessary.

Yep, you sure can. That then begs the question - what is and isn't necessary to make a forum operationally sufficient for it's intended purpose?

Quote
I personally think if it's a feature that can be argued to have benefit to a decent proportion of the userbase, without a significant performance hit, it's probably not bloat.

OK, fair enough. But as computers get more powerful the performance hit will decrease for a given set of processes, so really aren't we looking at mainly "features that can be argued to have benefit to a decent proportion of the userbase"?

Features are great, but at some point some person will chime in here and say SMF is getting bloated with too many features. You just watch. If that's true, then the functionality of this software is mainly maxed out - it's development is at an end. Like a four function calculator. There is no improvements that can be made to a four function calculator. It's does the four functions as well as can be done. The four function calculator is at a development end.

All that's left for SMF if that's true is updates to security, no updates to it's core function is required.

Remember (I want to state again) I am not complaining at all, I think SMF is about as good as it needs to be. I have no complaints at all.

Well, if you just need posts and **nothing** else...then you would be fine even with SMF 1.0.

That's true, at it's heart. But I do like some of the features that have been added. But truthfully I'm just stating I can't think of any more that need to be added. I'm open to being proven wrong though.

Quote
But xrunner, I'm not here to convince you there is any need for features or things, I just wanted to say there is space for improvement even in the basic user experience of "post and answer" (there is, believe me).

And I'm very keen to see what is up your sleeves.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 12:35:15 PM
Quote
what is and isn't necessary to make a forum operationally sufficient for it's intended purpose?

What do you call operationally sufficient? What I call it and what you call it are likely two different things. By whose intended purpose are you measuring it? You might be satisfied with a basic forum. For the uses I want to make of it, I need specific features.

Quote
OK, fair enough. But as computers get more powerful the performance hit will decrease for a given set of processes, so really aren't we looking at mainly "features that can be argued to have benefit to a decent proportion of the userbase"?

We have been looking at that for years. SMF 1.0 had all the 'operationally sufficient' stuff. Everything beyond that is improvements to various things with extra functionality that some people will need and others won't.

Quote
You just watch. If that's true, then the functionality of this software is mainly maxed out - it's development is at an end.

There are already people who won't move onto 2.0 for that reason.

Quote
Remember (I want to state again) I am not complaining at all, I think SMF is about as good as it needs to be

It's as good as it 'needs' to be, maybe. But that implies that it's perfect, which it certainly isn't. Even if you just fixed the hundreds of bugs known for 2.0 only, that's still very narrow-minded.

Quote
But truthfully I'm just stating I can't think of any more that need to be added. I'm open to being proven wrong though.

How many more examples would you like? Sure, we don't *need* anything else. But it would make the software more useful for more users if some of it was included, without impacting it for anyone else.

Quote
And I'm very keen to see what is up your sleeves.

And just think, SMF 2.1 is publicly downloadable and has been for months...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on March 31, 2013, 12:53:53 PM
Arantor - I just lost 15 minutes of typing of my response. I'm sorry. I'll try to write it up again later but right now I'm to aggravated.

Now I know a feature to request - automatic real-time post backups.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on March 31, 2013, 12:56:58 PM
Quote
Arantor - I just lost 15 minutes of typing of my response. I'm sorry. I'll try to write it up again later but right now I'm to aggravated.

No need to apologise to me. :)

Quote
Now I know a feature to request - automatic real-time post backups.

SMF 2.1 + 2 forks have this.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on March 31, 2013, 01:35:29 PM
I'd like to just see 2.1 finished up and go from there...yes there are many things that can be improved on any given project, but I think for me anyway that, the current step needs to be completed for, for considering other stuff. I like both and many points of view and many things can be accomplished , like forks and mods and widgets or add on or themes. I'm not partial to any of these.

I like SMF and the 2.1 alpha me not be what everyone wants, but it must be completed it in what ever its needs to secure where it meant to go at this point, as far as security and bugs, the other stuff maybe, brought up in the next version. hell I want to start using the 2.1 now for my live site, not a coder, but can't that much wrong with it as for functionality, and like I said  Wedge and other possible projects can do nothing less to help it along, Someone needs to make derision! without getting hung up on trying to please everyone at this point anyway. I love all this stuff and will support it all in anyway I possibly can, but I'm getting old fast and you youngster will see the year past by fast, and I'm talking 10 0r 20 years at a time.

talkers and the doers always the same.

I'm learning more and more everyday at the age of 64, and you young guys have all the talent and knowledge to get these thing accomplished and I know you all can get it done!

cooperation is missing out some where out there LOL! :}

Regards,
maxx
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Biology Forums on March 31, 2013, 01:57:05 PM
Quote
Now I know a feature to request - automatic real-time post backups.

Sweet idea.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on March 31, 2013, 03:10:15 PM
Quote
Now I know a feature to request - automatic real-time post backups.

Sweet idea.

I've been using these forums for 8 years and I finally learned to compose my longer posts in an external text editor. But today I had several things going on, I was making lunch, I was in a hurry to respond, and I deleted part of Arantor's quote in my post. I then clicked the back button and refreshed looking for something and what I wrote up was gone.

So, I just thought of something I didn't know I "needed" - automatic real-time post backups.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: maxg on March 31, 2013, 03:41:42 PM
yes an auto save would be nice!

regards,
maxx
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on March 31, 2013, 04:05:34 PM

Quote
Now I know a feature to request - automatic real-time post backups.

SMF 2.1 + 2 forks have this.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: emanuele on March 31, 2013, 06:26:01 PM
Arantor - I just lost 15 minutes of typing of my response. I'm sorry. I'll try to write it up again later but right now I'm to aggravated.

Now I know a feature to request - automatic real-time post backups.
You see, you want a new feature, while I solved the issue learning to post short answers. :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Chalky on March 31, 2013, 06:27:29 PM
Arantor - I just lost 15 minutes of typing of my response. I'm sorry. I'll try to write it up again later but right now I'm to aggravated.

Now I know a feature to request - automatic real-time post backups.

That's why I use the Lazarus plug-in for Firefox ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: xrunner on March 31, 2013, 06:34:00 PM
You see, you want a new feature, while I solved the issue learning to post short answers. :P

Yes indeed.

Unfortunately, on my forum short answers are few and far between.

That's why I use the Lazarus plug-in for Firefox ;)

Now she tells me! OK I'll take a look at this plug-in, thanks.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Tomy Tran on August 15, 2014, 01:05:22 PM
It's long time to get new news. Wake up dudes! When we can test SMF 3.0 ???
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 15, 2014, 01:06:32 PM
There is no such thing as 3.0, only 2.1 which is currently in development.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Dragooon on August 15, 2014, 01:06:52 PM
It's long time to get new news. Wake up dudes! When we can test SMF 3.0 ???
Believe it or not, but when we make it!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 15, 2014, 01:08:37 PM
Also, every time somebody whines about how long it takes, the date gets another week added to it.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on August 15, 2014, 02:45:19 PM
Also, every time somebody whines about how long it takes, the date gets another week added to it.

Now you're just mean. :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 15, 2014, 02:50:43 PM
No, not mean, just reinforcing the notion that complaining about it is about the worst thing to do.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on August 15, 2014, 03:23:22 PM
No, not mean, just reinforcing the notion that complaining about it is about the worst thing to do.

Your PR perspective is a bit wrong. But who am I to complain about it, eh? :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 15, 2014, 03:29:44 PM
Complaining at the speed of development isn't going to *change* anything.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on August 15, 2014, 04:06:05 PM
Complaining at the speed of development isn't going to *change* anything.

Of course not. That's the right way of doing things. (Except for those quotation marks.)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on August 15, 2014, 06:28:57 PM
If you want to speed up development, you can always help. If you don't know how to code but have spare web space, start testing the code and reporting bugs you find in the development tracker. Make sure you write a good bug report (http://www.softwaretestinghelp.com/how-to-write-good-bug-report/). (More information on writing good bug reports here (http://www.noverse.com/blog/2012/06/how-to-write-a-good-bug-report/), here (http://blog.bughuntress.com/software-testing-services/8-tips-for-writing-a-good-bug-report), and here (http://www.softwaretestinghelp.com/sample-bug-report/).) Of course, look to make sure your bug hasn't been reported so you don't file a duplicate.

If you are unsure how to set up your own testing environment, then just offer help to the community by supporting people. Helping lower the load of the forum team will give them more time to focus on development, or just a well-deserved rest.

Writing complaints on slow development only takes away time from those that are trying to develop the code or support the community.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Herman's Mixen on August 15, 2014, 07:02:57 PM
if you wanna speed up the development, you can pay for the charter membership so the team can pay the developers for a full force development :D

yes then and only then it will speed up :P

and probally we need more charter members ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 15, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
Hell, if the team wanted to pay me, I could find it in my heart to work on things...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Herman's Mixen on August 15, 2014, 07:14:27 PM
it was ment as sacasm :D

i know and be long enough around :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on August 16, 2014, 07:31:42 AM
Hell, if the team wanted to pay me, I could find it in my heart to work on things...

Too bad that the best things in life are always free.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Deaks on August 16, 2014, 09:10:02 AM

Too bad that the best things in life are always free.

Not always
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on August 16, 2014, 05:21:11 PM
if you wanna speed up the development, you can pay for the charter membership so the team can pay the developers for a full force development :D

It would need a lot of memberships if you're thinking about paying full time salaries.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Herman's Mixen on August 16, 2014, 06:25:47 PM
What did i say after that :P

and probally we need more charter members ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: SaltedWeb on August 16, 2014, 07:18:42 PM
I was a charter I guess near ten years ago when I think the 2nd beta was running to far to remember, I even forgot about it being there. Might be prudent advertise that Charter and Donation better.
I mean really who would not pay $49.95 a year for this amazing software and knowing it will help.
I just paid my hosting bill but will donate in the next two week.
Maybe get a donation thread going and get people to match it.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on August 16, 2014, 08:19:13 PM
To clear something, we are not going to pay some developers to fix bugs/write features for us. If you think or get the idea of "donations will speed up development" this is false. Do not think that way, SMF is a free software and all team members are volunteer to do things around, none gets paid.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Herman's Mixen on August 16, 2014, 08:58:09 PM
nah just made a statement, how it normally goes when use paid services... and ofcourse we see still people trying too push... free services... :D

SMF = simple Be Free ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 16, 2014, 09:11:16 PM
Payment is a huge motivation however and setting up some kind of bounty program might be an idea for consideration.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: SaltedWeb on August 16, 2014, 10:11:01 PM
To clear something, we are not going to pay some developers to fix bugs/write features for us. If you think or get the idea of "donations will speed up development" this is false. Do not think that way, SMF is a free software and all team members are volunteer to do things around, none gets paid.

Just to clear up my comment, ;) I was not even thinking donations would increase release.
I meant while it was on the topic, the site here really doesn't push Charter or Donations.
As I said I even forgot it was an option here.

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on August 17, 2014, 05:22:30 AM
Payment is a huge motivation however and setting up some kind of bounty program might be an idea for consideration.

Hmm.... But wouldn't that destroy the whole point of this project?


Something to think about. Is it the human that uses the money or is it the money that uses the human?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Dragooon on August 17, 2014, 05:23:17 AM
Something to think about. Is it the human that uses the money or is it the money that uses the human?
Regardless, money's nice*


* Not saying that one should/shouldn't setup a bounty program
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: NanoSector on August 17, 2014, 08:19:39 AM
Payment is a huge motivation however and setting up some kind of bounty program might be an idea for consideration.
I agree with this. https://launchpad.net/elementary also does this.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 17, 2014, 09:26:04 AM
Payment is a huge motivation however and setting up some kind of bounty program might be an idea for consideration.

Hmm.... But wouldn't that destroy the whole point of this project.


Something to think about. Is it the human that uses the money or is it the money that uses the human?

How would it destroy the point of the project? Giving money to people means they can prioritise their time here rather than on other activities that might give them money instead. Then everyone benefits from it.

Thing is, there are surprisingly many open source projects out there that pay people to work on them. Firefox and Linux, for example.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 17, 2014, 09:34:17 AM
Would payment be under the table or reportable to the IRS?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Dragooon on August 17, 2014, 09:41:34 AM
Would payment be under the table or reportable to the IRS?

Neither? SM is non-profit, it can still pay people.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 17, 2014, 09:42:48 AM
If such a thing were to happen with SMF I would envisage it would have to be reported to the IRS as income for the recipient. Certainly it is with the Mozilla Foundation, or even people who get paid by Google for bug bounties.

Non-profit does not mean no money. It just means that whatever revenues it makes has to used for the benefit of the organisation and its members, rather than profits for shareholders.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Dragooon on August 17, 2014, 09:44:00 AM
Quote
If such a thing were to happen with SMF I would envisage it would have to be reported to the IRS as income for the recipient
IRS or the respective tax authority in the recipient's country
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 17, 2014, 09:48:41 AM
That's what I meant, but yeah, in my case if such a thing were to happen it would be HMRC I'd report.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Illori on August 17, 2014, 10:55:41 AM
Would payment be under the table or reportable to the IRS?

Neither? SM is non-profit, it can still pay people.

SM is not officially a non-profit, it just uses that structure. we still need to pay taxes etc just like any other corporation.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 17, 2014, 11:13:53 AM
Well, actually, we are an NPO bY Nevada laws, we just have not completed the IRS application process to become a federally recognized one...   And by the recent IRS statements, it may never be possible to complete it, since they are not approving online companies 90%+ of the time any more
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 17, 2014, 05:27:06 PM
I would think you have better chances than most to become a NPO since you are an established on-line company.  Not a start-up venture.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Illori on August 17, 2014, 05:51:07 PM
the organization was only formed about 4 years ago, so it is not existing that long.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Deaks on August 17, 2014, 06:49:28 PM
depends if they will also consider the LLC as well ...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Night09 on August 17, 2014, 07:34:17 PM
Just register in a country it isnt so tough like the UK. Make CInDu (K@)  the 'Director' or whatever so its legally based here!

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/start-up-a-charity/registering-your-charity/how-to-register-your-charity-cc21b/

Ive seen him he is really real lol and im sure we could all muster up a bag of old clothes and shoes so we can have an SMF Charity      shop. :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 17, 2014, 07:45:48 PM
We are already a registered corporation in the US.  However, the IRS has been delaying approvals of online NPO companies for the last 3 years and has recently, basically stated that such will no longer even be considered.

According to the new "rules" the apache and Mozilla foundations would both have been rejected.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Deaks on August 17, 2014, 08:11:12 PM
Ive seen him he is really real lol ...

I am not sure about that ...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Night09 on August 17, 2014, 08:21:45 PM
Is it 100,000 signatures to make congress have to look at something or debate it?   Theres   339,042 people  registered so more than enough to make it happen. Just thinking of other options too.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Deaks on August 17, 2014, 08:44:51 PM
no its more like how much money you give them under the table ...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on August 17, 2014, 10:22:07 PM
Is it 100,000 signatures to make congress have to look at something or debate it?   Theres   339,042 people  registered so more than enough to make it happen. Just thinking of other options too.

There is no requirement like that. While you can petition a local representative from your district, they don't really have to do anything. Some states do have a process where you can get an item on the ballot for that state for a general vote by collecting physical signatures (which must be validated). Requirements for the number of signatures on that vary based on state rules.

You might be confused with the White House's "We the People" petition site. They currently have a requirement of 100,000 people to get a response from the White House. Meeting that goal doesn't guarantee any action other than a "thank you for support on this issue, we saw it". You can go to the petition site to see all the other non-responses that have been given.

If the GNOME Foundation can't get federal non-profit tax exemption status (http://blogs.gnome.org/jnelson/2014/06/30/the-new-501c3-and-the-future-of-free-software-in-the-united-states/), it is highly doubtful that Simple Machines (the Nevada corporation) would be able to gain it.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 18, 2014, 07:13:34 PM
Since using Tea Party will only get you rejected, how about renaming SMF as "Democratic Obama-Ware Forum Software" the current administration should then allow you to become a NPO.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on August 18, 2014, 07:37:29 PM
Since using Tea Party will only get you rejected, how about renaming SMF as "Democratic Obama-Ware Forum Software" the current administration should then allow you to become a NPO.

Can we keep this forum/software nations/governments-above? We all dislike the stuff IRS doing with Mozilla etc... But keeping here politic-free is best for all of us.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: SaltedWeb on August 18, 2014, 08:06:07 PM

 ::)
Oh brother., but any you want a hug.
Not a chance.


Perhaps if you can make it medically viable it can be used in other areas.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: byproduct on August 19, 2014, 07:07:36 PM
Since using Tea Party will only get you rejected, how about renaming SMF as "Democratic Obama-Ware Forum Software" the current administration should then allow you to become a NPO.

obama is now a lameduck president, n his way out, so you'll have to either adopt clinton or reid
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on August 19, 2014, 07:12:29 PM
ohh gotta love those South Park references. :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 19, 2014, 07:12:58 PM
And since this is the internet, why no ManBearPig?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on August 19, 2014, 07:17:34 PM
Because Al Gore isn't Obama's sidekick?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 19, 2014, 07:20:00 PM
But Al Gore invented the internet, everyone knows that!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: byproduct on August 19, 2014, 07:51:43 PM
ARPA is still active... maybe butter up what's his name at DOD
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 19, 2014, 07:52:12 PM
Now you're just getting all heavy and serious ;D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: byproduct on August 19, 2014, 07:58:26 PM
?hvy % serious?
APRA still inline & nsa/cia has to be accountable for spying?
EVEN WITH a techno president that uses IRS to slap down none ranking 3rd political parties?

Now that's getting heavy.

Also supports grounds for political commenting in this thread abut how net bases orgs can't get NPO
MORE SO WHEN you consider all the 503c's operating world wide and use internet functions on their process.


Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 19, 2014, 07:59:42 PM
I'm not saying things aren't messed up, I was just trying to be cheerful and positive for a change.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: byproduct on August 19, 2014, 08:03:47 PM
find out what the income % limits are
AND
Take a cue from microsoft
start handing out servers prepacked & configured with smf in 3rd world net poor & supressed countries.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on August 19, 2014, 09:02:40 PM
Here in 'Murrica we don't share. We lurvez our monopolies. :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: byproduct on August 19, 2014, 09:06:19 PM
what "NPO" have you heard of that IS NOT a monopoly and get preferential government treatment? A.K.A., "NGO's"

SIDENOTE: do gov bidding, ie, civ support for FEMA, spy for gov, etc


Think "falling tHRu the cracks" associated with radio america and usaid, etc...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on August 19, 2014, 09:56:49 PM
I'm not saying things aren't messed up, I was just trying to be cheerful and positive for a change.

Someone get this lad a doctor.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: mashby on August 19, 2014, 10:54:05 PM
The future of SMF=Trey Parker and Matt Stone

Formula for success?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 19, 2014, 10:55:54 PM
I vote ManBearPig.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 19, 2014, 11:46:44 PM
I am with Arantor on this one.....
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on August 20, 2014, 12:51:55 AM
Anyone up for the boogie man? hehe
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on August 20, 2014, 03:03:55 AM
I'm not saying things aren't messed up, I was just trying to be cheerful and positive for a change.

The end of the world is near!!! ;D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on August 20, 2014, 05:19:31 AM
Run, run, my pretty hen. I am Foxy Loxy and you are Henny Penny. Follow me if you want to not die.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on August 20, 2014, 07:33:25 AM
Run, run, my pretty hen. I am Foxy Loxy and you are Henny Penny. Follow me if you want to not die.

Okay, this is disturbing. Or is it?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: karlbenson on August 25, 2014, 06:38:11 AM
All that matters is so long as SMF continues in whatever guise!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on August 25, 2014, 01:21:02 PM
Good to see you around, again, Karl!

Be good to see SMF in a good guise, ay? :)

(Do I get a prize, for having the word "Good", three times, in two short phrases? I think I should...)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: gorbi on September 25, 2014, 06:27:07 AM
How i can see 2.1 for mobile devices?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on September 25, 2014, 06:38:19 AM
You'd need a crystal ball, to do that, coz it's not been released, as yet.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: gorbi on September 25, 2014, 06:41:09 AM
I mean Alpha
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on September 25, 2014, 07:25:53 AM
Well... I guess the only way, would be to install it and take a look. If you have a test site, you could do that, fairly easily, I believe.

Or, I know of a live 2.1 site, which you could take a look at.

http://www.smfhelper.com/community/index.php
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on September 25, 2014, 07:46:30 AM
You can download SMF 2.1 Alpha (Nightly) here (https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/archive/release-2.1.zip)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on September 26, 2014, 12:53:33 AM
Please be aware that there is minimal/no support for any non-release version of SMF. If you run into an issue, you'll have to solve it yourself.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Tomy Tran on September 27, 2014, 10:26:30 AM
You can download SMF 2.1 Alpha (Nightly) here (https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/archive/release-2.1.zip)

When I download this package, I find out I have one downloaded from June 24, 2013. It's seem that SMF has no more development plan? is this project stopped?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on September 27, 2014, 10:33:17 AM
You can download SMF 2.1 Alpha (Nightly) here (https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/archive/release-2.1.zip)

When I download this package, I find out I have one downloaded from June 24, 2013. It's seem that SMF has no more development plan? is this project stopped?

Weird... I downloaded from same link and I got 26.09.2014 build (which is last push made by me), as I checked SSI.php it shows Beta 1*, if there is an error its from GitHub.

* Beta 1 not released officially we are preparing it just file name changes! You'll see official announcement about SMF 2.1 Beta 1 here.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: gorbi on September 27, 2014, 11:06:01 AM
Well... I guess the only way, would be to install it and take a look. If you have a test site, you could do that, fairly easily, I believe.

Or, I know of a live 2.1 site, which you could take a look at.

http://www.smfhelper.com/community/index.php
I looked at this site on the tablet. There's a lot of small elements for navigation.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: NanoSector on September 27, 2014, 12:56:33 PM
You can download SMF 2.1 Alpha (Nightly) here (https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/archive/release-2.1.zip)

When I download this package, I find out I have one downloaded from June 24, 2013. It's seem that SMF has no more development plan? is this project stopped?
This might be more reliable in that case.
http://nanosector.ddns.net/builds.html

And an up-to-date test site...
http://nanosector.ddns.net/smf21
[/shameless self-promotion]

Well... I guess the only way, would be to install it and take a look. If you have a test site, you could do that, fairly easily, I believe.

Or, I know of a live 2.1 site, which you could take a look at.

http://www.smfhelper.com/community/index.php
I looked at this site on the tablet. There's a lot of small elements for navigation.
Can you post a screenshot and your screen resolution please?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on September 27, 2014, 01:43:27 PM
test site self-promotion...
I am also running a test site at http://test2.turtleshellprod.com

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: digger on September 27, 2014, 08:33:41 PM
Well... I guess the only way, would be to install it and take a look. If you have a test site, you could do that, fairly easily, I believe.

Or, I know of a live 2.1 site, which you could take a look at.

http://www.smfhelper.com/community/index.php
I looked at this site on the tablet. There's a lot of small elements for navigation.
Can you post a screenshot and your screen resolution please?

Try to get a finger in the items on a tablet or smartphone screen. Why not make regular buttons instead of text links and arrows?
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs15.postimg.org%2Fre4pxbda3%2Fscreen.png&hash=a4aedda198794a0002922d314fde7be4)

Look here, for example
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs1.postimg.org%2Fqstum7ndr%2Fscreen2.png&hash=ee44e3842cc00ed5918af164eddf6ab3)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on September 27, 2014, 09:03:25 PM
You realise those 'regular buttons' are *also* just links, right? It's purely a styling thing, rather than anything else.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: digger on September 27, 2014, 09:05:47 PM
It's purely a styling thing, rather than anything else.
Ok. But it's more usable styling thing then SMF default theme have.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on September 27, 2014, 09:07:15 PM
No disagreement from me, but I also know that the way SMF expands when you press the ... button makes this very much non-ideal to work with.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: digger on September 27, 2014, 09:17:58 PM
No disagreement from me, but I also know that the way SMF expands when you press the ... button makes this very much non-ideal to work with.
Not sure that a lot of people use ... button. I don't know, why would I want to go to page 123 of 234 :). And I still need a lot of clicks to get to page 123.
Maybe, it's time to change this button to something new?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on September 27, 2014, 09:19:07 PM
It's not my place to say whether a lot of people use it or not. Fact is, it's a barrier to doing something with this as it currently stands.

Good luck convincing people this needs changing, though...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: gorbi on September 28, 2014, 02:16:06 AM
Can make at least the Increase font?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on September 28, 2014, 04:02:25 AM
Yes you can do that, but having lots of tiny stuff all over the place is traditional. :D

Beats me why it still has the text that says "Pages:". It's obviously a page index. Everyone knows how they work these days. That text is a waste of space.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on September 28, 2014, 04:22:29 AM
Beats me why it still has the text that says "Pages:". It's obviously a page index. Everyone knows how they work these days. That text is a waste of space.

Gotta agree on that.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on September 28, 2014, 10:56:56 AM
Change is irrelevant. Resistance is futile. Your frustrations will be assimiliated.

(isn't that how it goes?)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on September 28, 2014, 11:27:11 AM
Change is irrelevant. Resistance is futile. Your frustrations will be assimiliated.

(isn't that how it goes?)

no.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on September 28, 2014, 11:27:59 AM
Next time I will have to put a huge-ass sign saying "I'm being funny", yes?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on September 28, 2014, 11:30:14 AM
Next time I will have to put a huge-ass sign saying "I'm being funny", yes?

no.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on September 28, 2014, 11:36:50 AM
You don't sound convinced.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on September 28, 2014, 11:39:32 AM
I am enjoying the funnier side of your, albeit odd, sense of humor. ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on September 28, 2014, 11:44:44 AM
You don't sound convinced.

http://www.wowhead.com/sound=11464/a-blcktmple-illidan-02
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Alpay on September 28, 2014, 12:09:14 PM
You don't sound convinced.

http://www.wowhead.com/sound=11464/a-blcktmple-illidan-02
:)))
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Masterd on September 28, 2014, 04:34:27 PM
/me is wondering what happened here.
 It used to be a constructive topic.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on September 28, 2014, 05:10:21 PM
/me is wondering what happened here.
 It used to be a constructive topic.

We love going off-topic :D :D its still ^^
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on September 28, 2014, 08:48:38 PM
If it weren't late at night I'd bust out the mic and record my own version of that quote. Then you could hear just how surprised I am at your lack of being convinced. I could even bust out the Vader quote about how I find your lack of faith... disturbing.


As for going off-topic, that's something I've felt for a long while, and I'm fairly certain it's one of the reasons things have been sub-ideal for so long... it's all too serious and stuffy. I'd certainly argue I've not helped at times, but of late in particular I've been trying to be positive - even when it's been hard - and bringing my brand of humour to the party, because a happy group is so much more productive than a miserable one.

I remember when this place used to be fun. Running jokes like me being a bot from the future from the time of SMF 7 (the one that has time travel) preventing the mistakes that are SMF 6, for example. Or more recently where Justyne and I switched avatars and had similar usernames and generally messed about having fun because I think the people here have forgotten how to have fun.

See, here's the thing people forget. What do we do here? We make software, right?

WRONG. That's not what SMF is about. SMF brings people together. It builds communities. Gives people places to gather on this rock as we hurtle around a flaming mass of nuclear fusion reactions. We cling to the skin of the world, fragile and lonely - and SMF is a tool to bring people together. Whether we do it well or whether we do it badly, that is what we do. Each of us here is doing just that - participating in the greatest social networking environment in the world.

Facebook is cool and all but in comparison to the feeling of people having a place to call theirs, to discuss whatever interests them, whatever fires their soul and passion... that's something. That's something special and wonderful and it has been my privilege to be part of that the last 5 years - as terrible an effect as it has had on me, but that's why I keep coming back, because each person we help is someone bringing a community together.

We touch lives here. Step back and watch the turning of the universe and you realise just how staggering an effect that you, me, them, everybody here has. EVERYONE is a part of this little miracle. We bring lives together.

But along the way it got so full of drama and tension that the fun left. But having fun is such a necessary part of it, because you need the fun to temper the darkness. And god knows I've had dark times in some of my time here. But the fun time makes the darkness bearable - and when that's going on, you, me, them, everybody... we move the world.

You guys all know the fulcrum symbol. That's what it means. We all stand together on one end, pulling and watching the lever tip across the fulcrum point. We all, together, move the world.

I refuse to be miserable about moving the world. I've been there. I've done that. I try to keep my misery in a few threads these days so I can concentrate on the rest of them moving the damn world in a positive way one step at a time. And I don't know about you, but I do know that we could make this work better if we all had a bit more fun doing it.

Going off topic is just the start.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antechinus on September 28, 2014, 08:58:42 PM
/me likes :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: live627 on September 29, 2014, 01:45:13 AM
/me applauds
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: kat on September 29, 2014, 05:41:59 AM
When I try to have phun, here, I often get glowered at...

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fatowhee.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F05%2Fgho-adult-glowers.jpg&hash=7100e7c76a223fbd5e28e93e1601492e)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: AllanD on September 29, 2014, 08:19:49 PM
Very nicely said Arantor.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Herman's Mixen on September 30, 2014, 08:12:56 AM
/me Agreed Arantor One :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: jsx on November 05, 2015, 05:10:12 AM
Why so long are you creating SMF 2.1? About 4 years you’re creating this engine and you cannot release the stable version. I understand that you’re creating SMF for free, non profit, but don't you think, that these almost 4 years it’s very long? Look at the phpBB group, they already released phpBB 3.1.6, MyBB group released MyBB 1.8.6, and SMF is drop back behind them. In July you released SMF 2.1 Beta 2 and still the milestone for Beta 3 wasn't reached. Why it string out to you? These are normal questions I’m not aimed at hurting nobody, I’m just asking out of curiosity.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on November 05, 2015, 06:47:42 AM
well, obviously, you have not been reading very much around the site or on GitHub....  nor do you apparently "understand" what it means that SMF is a volunteer project.

Yep... it's a "long time". 
We're not "stringing out" anything. We make releases when the release is ready. Beta3 is not ready, and so has not been released. Plain and simple.

As for the other softwares... what do they have to do with us?  (answer: absolutely nothing...)  I am happy that they have made releases. Good for them. However, that has no bearing on our own release schedule.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: jsx on November 05, 2015, 11:47:55 AM
well, obviously, you have not been reading very much around the site or on GitHub....  nor do you apparently "understand" what it means that SMF is a volunteer project.

Yep... it's a "long time". 
We're not "stringing out" anything. We make releases when the release is ready. Beta3 is not ready, and so has not been released. Plain and simple.

As for the other softwares... what do they have to do with us?  (answer: absolutely nothing...)  I am happy that they have made releases. Good for them. However, that has no bearing on our own release schedule.

I see that 59 people have investment in development of SMF 2.1 on Github and good, but still you didn't explain why SMF 2.1 creating almost 4 years, even if it is volunteer project. And so what that SMF 2.1 was built on the new technology but still isn’t a ready project. Maybe you developers aren’t stringing out but many thousand people are with their own forums which are acting on outdated SMF 2.0. As you see the technology went ahead. Year or 2 will pass before you announce the release to the stable version SMF 2.1, no offence intended, but at a snail's pace you are elaborating your software. I didn't write that they have to do with you I gave only an example, that they released new engines, but you still not. I understand the fact that you cannot release so quickly for some reasons, but it is a bit irritating, that’s stand and still doesn't have an end.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Illori on November 05, 2015, 11:56:32 AM
even if their are 59 people that may have contributed to SMF 2.1 that does not mean that all 59 people are contributing on a regular basis. we are doing the best we can to get 2.1 out the door. when it is ready and our dev team says it will be ready, it will be released.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on November 05, 2015, 12:13:09 PM
whenever someone says "no offense intended" -- that means that the person KNOWSthat what they are saying is indeed offensive and they just want to say it anyway...
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OCJ on November 25, 2015, 10:35:27 PM
Quote
I see that 59 people have investment in development of SMF 2.1 on Github and good, but still you didn't explain why SMF 2.1 creating almost 4 years, even if it is volunteer project.

They certainly are not "stringing it out".
People don't want to really comment here about slow progress --> hang out dirty laundry. I know some contributors are not around these days because of internal political problems some time ago and I'm sure that has affected its progress a lot. It is a bit sad but those things happen quite a lot in free open source projects.  It is worrying for me as it does look like it is starting to fall behind other popular boards. The release of 2.1 will go a long way to easing those concerns but the way things are we will just have to wait.

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on January 03, 2016, 08:48:11 AM
I dunno but I heard the same about SMF 2.0 too.  It simply takes time to develop forum software.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OCJ on January 06, 2016, 09:42:46 AM
You need an even greater sense of humour these days dealing with the anticipation of the next release. SMF users do seem to be a loyal lot though.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: jsx on January 19, 2016, 07:10:27 AM
1. Why you turf out in SMF 2.1 Core Features?

2. At one time I already mentioned that turf out the sidebar menus in 2.1 is a silly solution, more easily is moving through administration panel when the sidebar menus are set as it is in 2.0, why did you leave from this solution? You want to say me that for you it was hard to do?

3. Could you add the function to edit name of topic along with all title of answer? Such a possibility is in SMF only with moving the topic to other section. As for me it is needed option in the moderation.

4. Personally the fact that SMF has modifications isn't disturbing me, but whether the extensions which turn on and off wouldn't be better? Thanks to this any files SMF wouldn't be modified by the particular modification.

5. Why did you turf out the system of sending emails messages by SMF? The newest phpbb has this possibility and probably mybb also has this function, so why 2.1 hasn't? In my opinion it's a needed option thanks to which can send emails to users by forum without need to login on service provider own email.

6. Why in 2.1 did you turf out on such a user profile like in 2.0? You turf out a salutation it mean Hello admin, I know that is a little detail but without his salutation is somehow differently, empty. :P

Even if you did a profile in popup then there could be these all information which are in profile 2.0. It mean salutation and user name, show unread posts since last visit, show new replies to your posts and is lack of this information: you have 1 message, 0 new, but it also hasn't in basic theme in 2.0, but in others themes is added, so I hope that this function will show in other themes to 2.1 and also in this upper profile is lack information about that the is user or are users to approve like it is in 2.0.

7. Is a bug in news bar, if I'll add links to underline they're on whole window, and it shouldn't be like this, the underline of links should be the same like above.

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi65.tinypic.com%2Fwus29i.png&hash=aa101676a6abb1448ca878885cc040c6)

8. Why added content in News and Newsletters isn't centre? In SMF 2.0 after adding anything it was fall into place like this:

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi66.tinypic.com%2F15wmjgk.png&hash=5946a6a1eb331fcb8b2cb0bed04447b4)

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi64.tinypic.com%2F2vdsbqc.png&hash=032920b123479e068b1a8570236a37e0)

9. I don’t like this to pass into private messages it is necessary to click into INBOX button in popup or into the title of the message. Better solution is that which is in 2.0 when I’m clicking into private messages and I’m in the box, in my opinion it is a better solution. The same is regarding to alerts it isn't possible to click into any messages in alerts only have to click in button ALL ALERTS to be in own alerts so as for me it is pointless solution.

10. Why you cannot do or use nicer icons to the panel of administration?

11. In my opinion theme curve2 isn’t a nice theme, why you not tried that the new theme was better? Why you resigned from curve theme from 2.0? For so many years you are creating 2.1 you focused on the code of this project and on bugs, and you didn't work on theme curve2 which is average. You could leave basic theme from SMF 2.0 which is prettier than it in 2.1 which the better impression than curve2.

12. Something's wrong in 2.1 in set the time up for the entire forum, I’ve the same settings of server on 2.0 and on 2.1 the clock is showing the hour to the back, otherwise why in 2.1 in Profile > Look and Layout hasn’t that?

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2F33ejwq8.png&hash=5e42ef9161b0ad735baba1a68fc94db4)

13. Why in 2.1 hasn't function NOTIFY and SEND THIS TOPIC?

14. An additional function would be useful in allocating the post so that it is possible to set where exactly the allocated post is supposed to be in a new topic, because currently to merge the allocated post it works on hours and dates of adding this post.

Frankly 2.0 is still better than 2.1 generally, I don't know why you rid of some functions from 2.0 and from the general appearance, I don't like this.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on January 19, 2016, 07:57:47 AM
what the heck does "turf out" mean?   I have never heard that term... and you use it continually in your post...

ewwww....   just looked it up.  That is not an appropriate phrase to use and I take exception to your continual use of it.

We removed some things based on discussion and analysis.  If you don't like it, then add them back in via mod.   We are not putting this back in or adding any new features at this point.
Decisions were made. You don't like them? Choose a different theme and/or add mods.   plain and simple...   we're not going to please everyone with every choice.

that covers the majority of your complaints.

For your other complaints...

well... for one -- this thread is not for reporting issues with 2.1 nor it it for requesting features...    so, basically, your post doesn't actually belong in this thread at all.
For reporting bugs...    your report is less than useful - even if it was reported in the correct place (which it is not) since you don't indicate what actual version you are testing on.

And as fort "you don't like this". that's nice...   I can say "I do like this" and it has the same effect.   We've made decisions as a team. Overall, I think they have been the correct decisions to move forward. There will always be folks who don't like the new development. That's why we continue to support the old version(s) for a long time after the release of the new ones. So, fine...  you can continue to use 2.0.x until we release 3.0 and make 2.0 end of life.

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on January 19, 2016, 11:47:41 AM
@jsgrom You need to spend more time with SMF 2.1, most of the things you said has no valid ground. As for news section bug, its fixed quite long ago.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Oldiesmann on January 19, 2016, 12:18:18 PM
1. Why you turf out in SMF 2.1 Core Features?

Because it was confusing and made things more complicated.

Quote
2. At one time I already mentioned that turf out the sidebar menus in 2.1 is a silly solution, more easily is moving through administration panel when the sidebar menus are set as it is in 2.0, why did you leave from this solution? You want to say me that for you it was hard to do?

Because it was difficult trying to maintain the menu in two separate places and was actually breaking the layout in some places as I recall.

Quote
3. Could you add the function to edit name of topic along with all title of answer? Such a possibility is in SMF only with moving the topic to other section. As for me it is needed option in the moderation.

We can look into this.

Quote
4. Personally the fact that SMF has modifications isn't disturbing me, but whether the extensions which turn on and off wouldn't be better? Thanks to this any files SMF wouldn't be modified by the particular modification.

We've added dozens of additional integration hooks in 2.1 that will make it easier to add mods without actually editing the files, but it's not easy to write a system that would allow you to do everything without modifying files without rewriting most of SMF.

Quote
5. Why did you turf out the system of sending emails messages by SMF? The newest phpbb has this possibility and probably mybb also has this function, so why 2.1 hasn't? In my opinion it's a needed option thanks to which can send emails to users by forum without need to login on service provider own email.

Spam prevention and user privacy.

Quote
6. Why in 2.1 did you turf out on such a user profile like in 2.0? You turf out a salutation it mean Hello admin, I know that is a little detail but without his salutation is somehow differently, empty. :P

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here...

Quote
Even if you did a profile in popup then there could be these all information which are in profile 2.0. It mean salutation and user name, show unread posts since last visit, show new replies to your posts and is lack of this information: you have 1 message, 0 new, but it also hasn't in basic theme in 2.0, but in others themes is added, so I hope that this function will show in other themes to 2.1 and also in this upper profile is lack information about that the is user or are users to approve like it is in 2.0.

You can modify the popup to display additional details if you want.

Quote
7. Is a bug in news bar, if I'll add links to underline they're on whole window, and it shouldn't be like this, the underline of links should be the same like above.

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi65.tinypic.com%2Fwus29i.png&hash=aa101676a6abb1448ca878885cc040c6)

This should be fixed now

Quote
.
8. Why added content in News and Newsletters isn't centre? In SMF 2.0 after adding anything it was fall into place like this:

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi66.tinypic.com%2F15wmjgk.png&hash=5946a6a1eb331fcb8b2cb0bed04447b4)

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi64.tinypic.com%2F2vdsbqc.png&hash=032920b123479e068b1a8570236a37e0)

It never has been. You can use the center bbcode tag to accomplish this if you want.

Quote
9. I don’t like this to pass into private messages it is necessary to click into INBOX button in popup or into the title of the message. Better solution is that which is in 2.0 when I’m clicking into private messages and I’m in the box, in my opinion it is a better solution. The same is regarding to alerts it isn't possible to click into any messages in alerts only have to click in button ALL ALERTS to be in own alerts so as for me it is pointless solution.

When you get a new PM, it will show up in the "My Messages" popup and you can click into the message from there.

Quote
10. Why you cannot do or use nicer icons to the panel of administration?

We like the ones currently in use. What did you have in mind that would be better?

Quote
11. In my opinion theme curve2 isn’t a nice theme, why you not tried that the new theme was better? Why you resigned from curve theme from 2.0? For so many years you are creating 2.1 you focused on the code of this project and on bugs, and you didn't work on theme curve2 which is average. You could leave basic theme from SMF 2.0 which is prettier than it in 2.1 which the better impression than curve2.

If you don't like it you can use another theme.

Quote
12. Something's wrong in 2.1 in set the time up for the entire forum, I’ve the same settings of server on 2.0 and on 2.1 the clock is showing the hour to the back, otherwise why in 2.1 in Profile > Look and Layout hasn’t that?

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2F33ejwq8.png&hash=5e42ef9161b0ad735baba1a68fc94db4)

Go to Admin -> Features and Options and make sure the correct server timezone is selected. We did it this way because it's simpler.

Quote
13. Why in 2.1 hasn't function NOTIFY and SEND THIS TOPIC?

The "send topic" feature was removed to help combat possible spam. The notification feature is still there but has been rewritten - you can now choose how to get notified for each board and topic instead of just choosing one option for everything.

Quote
14. An additional function would be useful in allocating the post so that it is possible to set where exactly the allocated post is supposed to be in a new topic, because currently to merge the allocated post it works on hours and dates of adding this post.

This is not going to happen. SMF has always sorted posts based on when they were posted and adding an option to specify where the post should appear within a topic will make things extremely complicated.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: SleePy on January 21, 2016, 12:20:17 AM
Quote
4. Personally the fact that SMF has modifications isn't disturbing me, but whether the extensions which turn on and off wouldn't be better? Thanks to this any files SMF wouldn't be modified by the particular modification.

We've added dozens of additional integration hooks in 2.1 that will make it easier to add mods without actually editing the files, but it's not easy to write a system that would allow you to do everything without modifying files without rewriting most of SMF.

Just to top that off, SimpleDesk, a helpdesk customization for SMF, has in works a version for SMF 2.1 that requires 0 edits to the SMF code base to work.  By working with all the new hooks and getting a couple added, I was able to make this happen.  This is no simple feat, but its great to show a customization as big as SimpleDesk is able to work without modifying a single line of code.

I expect more customizations to follow suit and reduce or remove manual edits they make.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: jsx on January 28, 2016, 01:22:47 PM
what the heck does "turf out" mean?   I have never heard that term... and you use it continually in your post...

ewwww....   just looked it up.  That is not an appropriate phrase to use and I take exception to your continual use of it.

We removed some things based on discussion and analysis.  If you don't like it, then add them back in via mod.   We are not putting this back in or adding any new features at this point.
Decisions were made. You don't like them? Choose a different theme and/or add mods.   plain and simple...   we're not going to please everyone with every choice.

that covers the majority of your complaints.

For your other complaints...

well... for one -- this thread is not for reporting issues with 2.1 nor it it for requesting features...    so, basically, your post doesn't actually belong in this thread at all.
For reporting bugs...    your report is less than useful - even if it was reported in the correct place (which it is not) since you don't indicate what actual version you are testing on.

And as fort "you don't like this". that's nice...   I can say "I do like this" and it has the same effect.   We've made decisions as a team. Overall, I think they have been the correct decisions to move forward. There will always be folks who don't like the new development. That's why we continue to support the old version(s) for a long time after the release of the new ones. So, fine...  you can continue to use 2.0.x until we release 3.0 and make 2.0 end of life.

Modifications like these probably won’t show up. I personally like SMF for me it’s the best free software for putting the own forum I just expressing my opinion about that what I don’t like in 2.1, new version seems to be truncated version.

So write me where I can report bugs except github or to ask for new functions to 2.1, because frankly I have no idea. For you it should be plain and simple that I’m testing latest version 2.1 downloaded directly from yours github.

It’s not like this that I don’t like 2.1 completely but I don’t understand some of yours decisions in relation to 2.1, because in 2.0 everything is simpler and it’s my opinion. Maybe I got used to 2.0 too much.

SMF 2.1 with such a slow degree of the development will come out probably at the end of this year or later what I don't wish you, and 3.0 in 2020. :)

Because it was difficult trying to maintain the menu in two separate places and was actually breaking the layout in some places as I recall.

And why in elkarte side menu is available? This software rose from SMF 2.1, so why there can do it and in 2.1 not? Side menu is more comfortable than pull-down menu.

Quote
We can look into this.

Thanks.

Quote
We've added dozens of additional integration hooks in 2.1 that will make it easier to add mods without actually editing the files, but it's not easy to write a system that would allow you to do everything without modifying files without rewriting most of SMF.

All right but do you saw how extensions are working in phpbb 3.1? There normally you’re sending the extension to the server and then you enable them, it isn't overwriting any files, you can disable them.

Quote
Spam prevention and user privacy.

I understand it, but you could leave this function only for administrators. At present on my forum I disabled sending emails for everyone expect me as administrator so if I want to send email to someone through the forum I’m just sending and this function will be missing to me if I’ll someday update my forum to 2.1.

Quote
I'm not sure exactly what you mean here...

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2F1601tgz.png&hash=b44c6ebf5fbb7f8a3114cffb585cc055)

Quote
You can modify the popup to display additional details if you want.

In what way? Where it is possible to modify popup?

Quote
This should be fixed now

Still it isn't fixed. Last modification 2.1 on github was 7 days ago and this bug here on forum I reported 10 days ago.

Quote
It never has been. You can use the center bbcode tag to accomplish this if you want.

Impossible. I added the text or links without no centering and it automatically is shown in the middle, it’s in 2.0 you can check it. So probably in 2.0 it was a bug that the added content automatically was set in the middle and in 2.1 you fixed it.

Quote
When you get a new PM, it will show up in the "My Messages" popup and you can click into the message from there.

Need to click into title of private message in order can go into this message to read or into the INBOX button and it’s a little bit annoying but I understand that it’s a popup but in my opinion it shouldn’t be in popup but it is only my opinion. In popup could be only alerts which informed about coming private message or of other notifications.

Quote
We like the ones currently in use. What did you have in mind that would be better?

In my opinion icons for: Support and Credits, News and Newsletters, End Admin Session, Features and Options, Anti-Spam, Languages, Current Theme, Themes and Layout, Modification Settings, Search, Search Engines, Members, Membergroups, Permissions, Registration, Warnings, Ban List, Scheduled Tasks, Logs they could be better, it is only my opinion, rest of icons which I didn't list they are better, look more professional they are prettier, I have such a feeling, that these icons which I listed are wacky. Because the icon with information in the color blue isn’t much good. Icon for news could be different, it can also be newspaper, but I have other vision for this icon. Icon of end of the session is gray. The icon of sprocket wheel could be, but in internet I saw prettier. The padlock for the spam is average. Generally speaking I have no idea why you used padlocks for the tab spam. The icon of languages is average. Icons for theme are gray. The icon for managing of modifications hasn’t anything to do with the modification, it looks like puzzle. The icon of loupe is gray, I saw better. The icon for the searching engines is gray. Icons of Members, Membergroups aren’t so bad but could be better. The icon of keys for Permissions is gray. What keys have common to Permissions? The icon for Registration could be better, this blue stick man is gray. Icon Warnings is wack, this icon looks like traffic lights, change it. Icon of Ban List is ugly change her. The Scheduled Tasks icon could be better. In drop-down menu you used smaller other icons, they are better than the ones bigger.

Quote
If you don't like it you can use another theme.

I spent a lot of time with this theme and isn't so bad, although could be better, it what on top of I don't like in curve2 it’s orange contour in My Community - Info Center somehow for me this color doesn't match to the blue color. And I really don't understand what you added icons up to at: Home, Search, Admin, Moderate, Members, Logout.

Quote
Go to Admin -> Features and Options and make sure the correct server timezone is selected. We did it this way because it's simpler.

I’ve set the right time of server in admin panel for whole forum and when I’m log on then the main clock on main page show a one hour to back. In my profile format of time I’ve set as default for forum. In Timezone is automatically set [UTC] UTC and it causes showing the hour to the back, but when I choose my region from list then the hour will be correct. If somebody will be want to put the own forum on 2.1 after installing software as the administrator will be has a set wrong time for his account. You should fix it, because for me it looks like the bug. It should working in this way that after change the time of the server for the entire forum to all users including the account of administrator a time will change on correct, because now it doesn't work in this way. In 2.0 it works correctly, if the time of the server of the forum is set on UTC all users will have this time, but when I will change the time of the server on correct then for all accounts automatically will set the correct time.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on January 28, 2016, 01:35:04 PM
almost all of what you posted is personal preference -- and I happen to (personally) disagree with your contentions regarding the theme, layout, icons, etc...
but that is the wonder of themes and templates and icons... you can make our get a theme or icons that YOU like and not worry about what "the default" is.

2.1 is basically feature locked at this point. New features are unlikely to be added, since we are TRYING to actually get a release made -- and any time a new feature is added, it adds more time for development, testing and templating.

bugs can be reported on GitHub (preference) or in the bug reports board here...

As for why elkarte does something and we don't... why not ask them.   We decided to do it this way. We felt this was a better choice...  they may have done something else -- but that has no bearing on our choices.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: jsx on January 28, 2016, 02:28:09 PM
almost all of what you posted is personal preference -- and I happen to (personally) disagree with your contentions regarding the theme, layout, icons, etc...

There are 30 icons in the panel of administration where half of them looks worse, weak than other so I wrote here my opinion, cannot be this way, that everyone will be praising 2.1. If I wanted I'll change to myself these icons on which I like more, but it that's not the point, I point you out that the half of these icons is sucks. So if you don't have a graphic designer which would create all icons professional don't change them. Is a full of free icons just have to devote the time and to find them on free sites, but of course why isn't it? Since such a children's icons can be. I don't know how it is possible to tip icon smile into side or choose traffic lights icon on warnings icon.

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi65.tinypic.com%2F140dw93.png&hash=f8b6f8fabba45713fc9a6c59827ab60f)

(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.clker.com%2Fcliparts%2Fe%2F9%2Ff%2Fd%2F11949849751056341160traffic_light_dan_gerhar_01.svg.hi.png&hash=653627e39b3f5b1b678ff414f7e95c4e)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Illori on January 28, 2016, 02:32:04 PM
it is your personal opinion that the icons dont look good. that does not mean that everyone agrees with you. if you dont like them, when you run 2.1 you can change them to what you do like. we cant please everyone.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on January 28, 2016, 02:57:55 PM
I am sorry that you hate the icons.

I happen to like them... and I do not believe that are childish or unprofessional at all.

As we have stated, a number of times...  if you don't like them then use your own -- no one is FORCING you to use the default icons or the default theme.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Siirist on January 31, 2016, 12:44:19 PM
Hi,

I know nothing about all this EXCEPT that writing all those .phps so that they work together harmoniously has to be a HUGE TASK!!

I would rather wait even as many as 6-10 years to get something that works!

For a reference on releasing versions prematurely see Microsoft Windows. From MS Windows 95 to current they are constantly building patches so that the version will operate as intended.

To SMF I say "Thank you for taking your time and getting it right".

May all find what they are looking for through Themes, MODs, or by uploading images and then modifying the appropiate phps to get the desired effect.

Be Well,
Siirist
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OCJ on January 31, 2016, 10:37:13 PM
I think it is always difficult managing such a large group of volunteers but SMF needs a clear system for development decisions - a democratic way of deciding about contributions and future ideas. If needed then a committee to decide a higher level road map.

A lot of developers have left and they should address that problem more openly (instead of just saying it takes time to get releases out).


Quote
I would rather wait even as many as 6-10 years to get something that works!

The main problem is not getting it right - the problem is the turn over of staff (volunteers) is too high.

I wonder how many people think this:
"I would rather move on and get something that is 6-10 years ahead in development."

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on January 31, 2016, 10:58:00 PM
Allow me to correct that. Perhaps a little too blunt since I'm on the phone.

It's been a while since there was a change in the development team.  Almost 4 years.

Sure there was issues but all of that has largely been put behind.  There's a solid group of devs who contribute constantly,  there's motivation and there's will and perhaps more importantly there's hope and confidence.
 So yeah we had problems,  sure we had issues yeah some people left,  this OK but that's all in the past,  we have been pretty stable for a while and I'm pretty sure it will continue that way.

I really don't know from where you're getting your info from but really thigs aren't  as bad as you think you are. But don't take. My word for granted go and check SMF's github.com repo and see for yourself.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on January 31, 2016, 11:00:05 PM
Ummm.. We have a clear system for development decisions.

And yes, while turn over was an issue... We have never hidden it...   So, both of your suggestions seem disingenuous.

Also...  While turn over was an issue, it is not and never has been "the problem". We have a good crew of developers right now who are working on getting it right... And they have been doing a bang up job moving down that path.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OCJ on February 02, 2016, 06:30:40 AM
Developers was probably a bad choice of word.

I would change that to say the number of contributors has declined. I still think SMF development has slowed down a lot and it is taking too much time to release new versions (compared to other similar open source forums). That's just my opinion and those replying have theirs.

SMF 2.0 beta 1 to beta 4 in 1 year.
SMF 2.1 beta 1 to beta 2 in  8 months.


SMF 2.0 Gold  - June 11, 2011.

I think most people would have expected SMF 3.0 by now. I have heard many people say it is very unlikely we will see SMF 2.1 until 2017.
Nearly six years to get from 2.0 to 2.1.

When you look at themes that is a very very long time.  SMF default theme should by now look as good as what Elkarte are using - simple and clean, mobile friendly out of the box.
Personally I do not like Curve very much and there should have been some kind of  'colorizer' included with it. The reaction to mobile friendly sites and themes was extremely slow at SMF. The ad hoc approach releasing a (still beta) mod for it about sums it up.

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 02, 2016, 07:39:50 AM
Ok... so -- anyone who is saying "you won't see 2.1 until 2017 is a naysayer and has no actual input into or out of the actual team doing the work"   so-   don't believe them. We never give out dates...

as for Elkarte... good luck to them. personally, I intensely dislike their default theme.  So, there you go...   you like it, I hate it... but you don't see me over there demanding that they change the default to suit my desires.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OCJ on February 02, 2016, 08:09:04 AM
Quote
but you don't see me over there demanding that they change the default to suit my desires.

I am not 'demanding' anything. I am just making a point about development.

The main point there about the template, which you didn't address, was that the default template wont have changed for 6 years. That is an incredibly long time for themes and templates.
Mobile friendly themes have been used for over 3 years now.
In this area SMF has fallen behind.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Illori on February 02, 2016, 08:33:02 AM
the default theme for SMF 2.1 is already responsive. there is a mod available for SMF 2.0. what else do you want?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 02, 2016, 08:48:07 AM
and there are, at this point dozens of responsive themes for SMF 2.0.x
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OCJ on February 02, 2016, 09:55:43 AM
Quote
and there are, at this point dozens of responsive themes for SMF 2.0.x

Quote
what else do you want?

Quote
but you don't see me over there demanding that they change the default to suit my desires.

I doubt there are 'dozens'... so you say there are what, 30-50 themes that are responsive... rolling over  :P

The recent ones that were provided have plenty of issues with the menu - do not work properly.


I made a point that development has slowed a lot (The future of SMF) and the theme is well outdated.
The replies are very negative - suggestions of 'stop complaining', or 'what do you want'.

It sounds like any critical comment is not wanted. So sorry, SMF is wonderful, best thing since sliced bread. Dont even bother changing it. One 100% satisfied user (of  another forum soon).





Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: feline on February 02, 2016, 10:09:46 AM
The SMF 2.1 Theme is mobile ready (say's google  :D)
(https://www.simplemachines.org/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvirgo.portamx.com%2FCustomImages%2Fgoogle_mobile_check.png&hash=455af38c32a34a1c2bc002edca3cb304)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Siirist on February 02, 2016, 10:22:33 AM

I doubt there are 'dozens'... so you say there are what, 30-50 themes that are responsive... rolling over  :P

The recent ones that were provided have plenty of issues with the menu - do not work properly.


I made a point that development has slowed a lot (The future of SMF) and the theme is well outdated.
The replies are very negative - suggestions of 'stop complaining', or 'what do you want'.

It sounds like any critical comment is not wanted. So sorry, SMF is wonderful, best thing since sliced bread. Dont even bother changing it. One 100% satisfied user (of  another forum soon).

Greetings,

This is just my point of view.

This is (in my opinion) someone that is asking British Motor Works (BMW) to at "good pace" design and manufacture a similar SUV to those that Subaru, Ford, Chevrolet, and Dodge/Chrysler have been manufacturing for some time.

BMW responds, "We are looking to create a comfortable, dependable, and efficient vehicle that will give our customers peace of mind, and have a high resale value.
In order to accomplish the enormity of this task, we are being methodical to ensure that we reach those goals.
To those that desire to have a SUV at this time, we can only ask that you wait, or purchase a SUV from one of our competitors.
We want to assure you that the end result of our work will provide a superior SUV that will fulfill the needs of our customers."

Just the way I see it.

Regards,
Cloud

PS ~ I have found that the SMF Default theme is responsive on my Samsung S3
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on February 02, 2016, 10:36:50 AM
ok... maybe dozenS is a slight exaggeration
However, there are AT least A DOZEN...   probably more.

And I have no issue with the menu on the three that I use (by Bloc)

As for "You made a point..."  um... nope... You made a comment (opinion) which you attempted to pass as fact (which we have since explained and/or proven to be mere opinion, not fact)
The only negativity here is your refusal to accept that your opinion does not constitute fact nor does your (individual) opinion have a large influence on the path that we have already established.

We welcome CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.... and while SOME of your commentary has been constructive - for the most part, it has been nothing more than complaining that "you don't like X or Y" or "someone else does what I want, why can't you?" or "You guys are so slow...."
None of that is particularly constructive... 

and our answers of "Well, if you don't like the default theme, you can use an alternative theme or icons quite easily" hardly seems negative, in the least...  as a matter of course, I find that to be rather positive. We offered an alternative to your complaints that you did not like the new defaults.


So, your snark here, and in other threads is pretty much uncalled for.

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on February 02, 2016, 10:42:54 AM
So.... instead of bickering to each others words, why don't we try to focus on the points you are trying to make huh?

I would change that to say the number of contributors has declined. I still think SMF development has slowed down a lot and it is taking too much time to release new versions (compared to other similar open source forums). That's just my opinion and those replying have theirs.

This needs to be addressed though.

Other forum softwares don't have multiple versions to attend to. Don't have an already established userbase, don't have the contractions any seasoned software has. A better comparison would be against other seasoned open source forum, so go check any other seasoned forum out there, everyone struggles the same as us.

It is pretty easy to "Stand on the shoulders of giants", to take advantage of everything SMF built over the years, make it your own and release it as new without having to take responsibility for everything else,  yeah, thats quite easy, its an easy way out, thats why you see more activity.

But its only temporarily, any open source software will begin to struggle as soon as they start to grow, bigger userbase equals bigger team, equals mayor chances of discussions and drama and splits... its inevitable unless of course you don't want to ever expand but I highly doubt that, anyone wants to see their code being used by everyone out there.


So yeah, you can have your opinion I just want to make sure you have plenty of evidence to get yourself informed.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on February 02, 2016, 06:06:23 PM
Other forum softwares don't have multiple versions to attend to. Don't have an already established userbase, don't have the contractions any seasoned software has. A better comparison would be against other seasoned open source forum, so go check any other seasoned forum out there, everyone struggles the same as us.

I think that's the key here. There is a ton of interest by developers in "greenfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenfield_project)" development. They can make a huge impression on how the software works that way. There isn't a huge support and maintenance demand. There isn't a ton of fighting with older development methodologies used back with older tech. It's everything SMF is not.

Some forks like Elkarte can do what they want because many of those issues aren't present. They don't have a legacy userbase. They can easily rip out a ton of stuff that a more conservative project like SMF may want to slowly refactor or has to support for some reason or another.

Between the overall decline of forum usage and the maturity of SMF, there are a dearth of developers that can be called upon to contribute. Luckily, there are still some dedicated developers doing great work, even if it's not highlighted prominently on this site.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: OCJ on February 02, 2016, 10:49:26 PM
I do not know any other forum (or OP CMS) that dwells on past versions so long. It is a drain on mod and theme contributors as well.
With limited resources it doesn't seem like a good choice to keep supporting old versions so long. They can upgrade.

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: tpgames on April 18, 2016, 11:19:16 PM
I may have some issues with SMF, but I LOVE the fact that I can have child categories many miles deep if I want to. I also love that fact that I can actually ADD custom smileys to the Nth degree. I've tried other forum software and it was horrific trying to get it to do what I needed it to do. It was so sandboxed that it was impossible to customize hardly anything with my lack of ability to program from the back end, and force the issue. phpBB I think was the most hated. Yabb was okay, to a point, but SMF just hit the ball so out of the park, that I never looked back a 2nd time. (I went from SMF to Yabb back to SMF). BTW, Oxwall has its own social network platform with blogs and forum. Their forum is not as intuitive as SMF, and has lots of buy-me features. SMF even beats THEM!

What I'd love to see, is smiley categories, as switching which folder I get to use for smileys, and then editing the post is doable I think, but is a bit of a hassle. Even the option of having the smiley pop-up have more than one page where I could just click on which page number of smileys I want. I might try and figure out how to get page numbers for smileys. With any luck, I might be able to figure it out by August of this year. (Slow brain ;) )
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Steve on April 19, 2016, 07:16:13 AM
I also love that fact that I can actually ADD custom smileys to the Nth degree.

You might want to read this thread (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=529231.msg3756269#msg3756269).

What I'd love to see, is smiley categories, as switching which folder I get to use for smileys, and then editing the post is doable I think, but is a bit of a hassle. Even the option of having the smiley pop-up have more than one page where I could just click on which page number of smileys I want. I might try and figure out how to get page numbers for smileys. With any luck, I might be able to figure it out by August of this year. (Slow brain ;) )

http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/index.php?mod=2782

(That mod does have a least one glitch which I can tell you about if you're interested.)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: tpgames on April 22, 2016, 11:50:02 AM
I am familiar with the one glitch concerning moving the 1st smiley on a tab and the work around for it.
Is there another glitch I should know about? (Besides the one where I am having issues getting it to work at all on 2.0.11?) [part of that issue might be a width issue in CSS that I have to check out.]
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Steve on April 22, 2016, 08:30:52 PM
I am familiar with the one glitch concerning moving the 1st smiley on a tab and the work around for it.
Is there another glitch I should know about?

The first smiley glitch is the one I was talking about. :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: badon on May 02, 2016, 06:47:34 AM
I do not know any other forum (or OP CMS) that dwells on past versions so long. It is a drain on mod and theme contributors as well.
With limited resources it doesn't seem like a good choice to keep supporting old versions so long. They can upgrade.

This is actually why I like SMF so much. It's somewhat of a FreeBSD development style, as opposed to a Linux style. FreeBSD doesn't have all the latest features, but what it does have works the first time you try to use it, and you don't have to worry as much about security because it's well-tested. The antithesis of SMF would probably be something like PHPBB that has a lot of features and a Linux development style, but is not so good for security and reliability.

I think the choice of name, "Simple Machines", says it all. SMF is simple, tough, well-tested, and will probably be supported far enough into the future that you don't have worry about constant upgrades, inadequate testing, and incompatibility problems. You're still right, of course. But it's a trade-off. For me, I would prefer to have SMF be plain and reliable, instead of having rapid advances.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: engrz on May 05, 2016, 05:42:21 AM
Very good.. Keep it up
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: BiGBLiZZ on May 28, 2016, 07:19:44 PM
(That mod does have a least one glitch which I can tell you about if you're interested.)

I am interested... :/
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Steve on May 29, 2016, 08:28:41 AM
We're getting off topic so pm me and I can explain it. :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: dingaling on June 04, 2016, 08:33:24 PM
Quote
and there are, at this point dozens of responsive themes for SMF 2.0.x

Quote
what else do you want?

Quote
but you don't see me over there demanding that they change the default to suit my desires.

I doubt there are 'dozens'... so you say there are what, 30-50 themes that are responsive... rolling over  :P

The recent ones that were provided have plenty of issues with the menu - do not work properly.


I made a point that development has slowed a lot (The future of SMF) and the theme is well outdated.
The replies are very negative - suggestions of 'stop complaining', or 'what do you want'.

It sounds like any critical comment is not wanted. So sorry, SMF is wonderful, best thing since sliced bread. Dont even bother changing it. One 100% satisfied user (of  another forum soon).

This is exactly how I feel. I mean I like SMF and have been running it for quite a while, but it really is pretty outdated and awkward to upkeep. The devs shouldn't be here complaining about users complaining, they should be doing the devving. They sound really jealous and angry and .. tense for some reason. I have been thinking about participating but the community seems quite hostile, so I think I'll pass. No one wants to work with a bunch of whiners and reading about dev team internal politics and drama is a big turn off. I guess it's a problem with many FOSS projects when some devs think the product is their personal 'baby' and get all jealous about changes and hostile towards criticism.

Well, just that was my 2 cents as a new user here.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on June 04, 2016, 10:16:41 PM
Ummm... Actually, you are wrong.

First, the devs are not the ones responding here, for the most part. They avoid this thread because of the idiots like the one you quoted. Reading crap like that is disheartening when they are giving their time and effort to build code.

I am the former project manager and have been a team member for nearly a decade...  And attitudes like that get my goat, because the devs ARE working.  Remember, we are all volunteers. No one gets paid for smf.

The whiners are not the ones on the team, I might add... And the community is only really hostile toward those whiners...

So, basically,my our two cents can be retrieved, because the comments you posted seem to be based on your misunderstanding of the situation and the crappy post of some whiners who want their cake now...

Regarding upkeep... How is smf awkward?  It's a one click update when patches are released.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: dingaling on June 04, 2016, 10:52:44 PM
Ummm... Actually, you are wrong.

Well, this pretty much sums up the feeling I get of this place; you are right because you are a "team member" or whatever and I'm wrong. What a ******ty attitude, if you will excuse my French. Just. Wow. I mean, I might have volunteered, I might have wanted to help get to the mythical 2.1 faster but you just managed to refine everything that is wrong about this community into these words. I guess you're doing so well you can manage to spit on new users here. Good for you.

Quote
First, the devs are not the ones responding here, for the most part. They avoid this thread because of the idiots like the one you quoted. Reading crap like that is disheartening when they are giving their time and effort to build code.

Devs, team members, whatever. You represent the whole SMF organization to the newcomer and you just spat on my face and start doing semantics. Who are you to call someone "idiot"? Are you a better person? You, sir, are a neckbeard and not a gentleman. Hows that for an insult? I'm a developer and I don't get disheartened by end users because I know what I'm doing. And there's a proper process in place in my development so my end users know when to expect the next version.

Quote
I am the former project manager and have been a team member for nearly a decade...  And attitudes like that get my goat, because the devs ARE working.  Remember, we are all volunteers. No one gets paid for smf.
As a project manager, you have been doing a poor job. Sorry. We all know the devs are working, but due to poor communication, community steering, voluntary participation coordination and milestone and project planning as well as apparent issues with mod libraries and such, it doesn't show. And the project manager is to blame.

Quote
The whiners are not the ones on the team, I might add... And the community is only really hostile toward those whiners...
Here's a free tip: stop calling your community "whiners". What an absolutely horrible, elitist and condescending paternalistic approach. Why are you even here commenting? What is your goal? To destroy all input to the SMF project? Because I for sure won't be reading your reply to this message, because frankly I don't care.

Quote
So, basically,my our two cents can be retrieved, because the comments you posted seem to be based on your misunderstanding of the situation and the crappy post of some whiners who want their cake now...

Regarding upkeep... How is smf awkward?  It's a one click update when patches are released.

I don't understand the first part, but I can comment on the awkward upkeep; I have been using SMF for years and it really isn't very user friendly. The menus are all over the place, the structure is a mess and often updates require manual editing / coding. It really isn't top notch and it's ok. But if you add to it a toxic community with arrogant "team members" who like to bully new users, potential developers, community builders and other interested people, then yes, you're in trouble. I don't expect you to understand this as it's obviously been said to all the forum staff here many times and it seems to continue.

I'm sorry if I've offended you guys but this is honestly how I feel and I will go back to lurking now. To all the devs though, keep up the good work.

Oh yeah and one more thing, for crying out loud, update these forums, they're your calling card and a potential new users cannot even register because of your antiquated verification system (ReCaptcha, there's a mod for it)! Create some confidence in your community instead of bullying them.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on June 04, 2016, 11:22:14 PM
You haven't offended me, because you still don't seem to get it...  And ignorance is curable.

First...  Your assumption of a formal development project is sadly confused. You seem to think that this is a company with paid employees that can be forced or threaten firing...  This is an open source, volunteer project. No one gets paid. Everything is done by volunteers and all efforts are GIVEN to the project, and thus the community.  So, demanding milestones, etc is just not going to happen. We tried a more formal project process...   The developers revolted, the team was unhappy. So, we stopped. Because, for us, this is a work of passion, not a job.

And that is why certain behaviors get the response that you see.  We spend our 8 hours a day at our normal jobs... And then we get online and spend hours more helping the community here... reviewing mods and themes... And developing code for both improvements to the current version and the next version.

So, yes...  We get a little testy when people show up and act entitled... Or pretend to know what it takes to develop and support a project of this size.  I am known for being extremely blunt. Yep... I get criticized for it fairly regularly...   I don't mince words. I say what I mean and don't sugar coat it with flowery language.  Usually, the only people that this actually offends are the ones who did something that deserved a slap-down anyway. Sometimes others, who are used to everyone acting all nicey nice. To them, I say: come and and welcome to the real world and the Internet. ;)
Yup, I said that you were wrong.
How, in any real world is that "spitting on a new user"??
You made a statement. I told you that statement is incorrect and proceeded to explain why.
That's called education.

I also never called the community whiners.  I called very specific Individuals whiners and/or idiots. Those people who I have called such have established their credentials, and I am just calling it out.
So, no... I am not elitist in the least. I will gladly spend my time coaching a person through setup, configuration and customization of their forum and site... I, and the rest of the team welcome questions and seek to help those who are looking for help.   What I ( and I suspect others) are sick of and get snarky about are the entitled individuals who have nothing better to do than criticize... But are not actually willing to step up and contribute.

I have a sign which I just got for our local dog park...  We spent 7 years and $300,000 getting this park built, and, just like here, there are people who feel they have an entitled right to criticize the speed that things happen, without actually understanding and without actually participating.
"Before you complain...
... Have you volunteered yet?"

That pretty much sums it up.
No bullying involved.

Regarding the other comment on the awkwardness...   I agree to some level... But disagree with your global statements
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: dingaling on June 04, 2016, 11:37:14 PM
No offense, but based on your reply, I think the SMF team would be better off without you.

You say you want volunteers but who in their right mind would volunteer after such a response? Seriously?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on June 05, 2016, 12:17:37 AM
SMF 1.0 Beta 1: September 29th 2003
SMF 1.0 RC1: August 10th 2004 (10 months)
SMF 1.0 Final: December 29th 2004 (1 year and 3 months from 1st beta)

SMF 1.1 Beta 1: March 28th 2005
SMF 1.1 RC1: September 20th 2005 (6 months)
SMF 1.1 Final: December 2nd 2006 (1 year and 8 months)

SMF 2.0 Beta 1: August 24th 2007
SMF 2.0 RC1: February 4th 2009 (1 year and 5 months)
SMF 2.0 Final: June 11th 2011 (3 years and 10 months)

SMF 2.1 Beta 1: November 21st 2014

Based on the trend above, the following is an estimate about when SMF 2.1 RC1 and gold will be out:

SMF 2.1 RC1: November 2018 (4 years, based on trend above)
SMF 2.1 Final: between September 2022 and September 2024 (8-10 years)


I think the main issue is that either the SMF team is understaffed or SMF 2.1 is much more complex than 2.0 and thus, takes more time. I am ok with waiting if it means we're gonna get a good piece of forum software that kept up with the times and can still rival competitors, but I sure hope the trend above is gonna be broken >.<


Regarding rude staff replies, I'M thinking that maybe that staff should spend less time on the forums so they can concentrate on their lives and SMF, and a new group of support staff should take care of customer support. I know that it's a free software, but rude support can give SMF a bad reputation via word to mouth. And people who come here sees this as disrespectful towards the community and might be even less willing to contribute to the SMF project as a result.


Regarding people who whine about how long it takes for SMF 2.1 to be done, maybe extra promoting of the Github repo is in order? Or maybe extra transparency?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on June 05, 2016, 12:39:08 AM
How much more transparent than GitHub can it get?

also, the only rudeness is in return to rudeness. ;)
This is not a support thread...   Support is provided to those who ask for it. :D

As for new support staff...   That's a nice suggestion. Where do you suggest that staff comes from? :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: DJ Omnimaga on June 05, 2016, 01:05:12 AM
The GitHub repo is transparent, but only to people who knows PHP. If you don't know PHP then it's kinda hard to scan through the history to figure out what part of the SMF that got fixed or if something new got implemented.

The problem is if the other user did not intend to be rude then if you reply with actual rudeness, then I can totally understand why you might receive backlash afterwards. For example, just because I am worried that SMF 2.1 is going the same route as Duke Nukem Forever and decide to voice my concern about it doesn't mean I am trying to start a fight and I might not even be aware (either due to asperger syndrome, lack of social skills or lack of experience on software development discussion) that it's seen as rude.

As for new support staff, there are two ways of hiring: Either get people to apply or promote them. Both solutions requires a group of staff to review the potential staff to see if they're worthy enough as support staff to be added.


Of course, all of this are suggestions, though, but I can totally understand some users concerns about what I mentioned above (although I do know that certain people are very impatient).
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Irisado on June 05, 2016, 05:52:13 AM
Dingaling: Your main point seems to be to criticise the attitude of the Team.  I think that before you take such a position, it would be prudent of you to consider how you address people, and how this approach results in a self-fulfilling prophecy.

First you say the following:

The devs shouldn't be here complaining about users complaining, they should be doing the devving.

This comes over as a command.  Such a statement is very antagonistic and authoritarian, thus it's likely to elicit the sort of response which allows you to claim that the community is being picked on.

A better way to formulate this would have been to ask whether there's too much other stuff going on which is distracting the attention of the Developers and perhaps suggest that other team members could handle it instead to free up their time.

Quote
They sound really jealous and angry and .. tense for some reason.

This is an emotive value judgement, which again is likely to wind people up and result in hostile responses.  There was no need to say this at all.

Quote
No one wants to work with a bunch of whiners and reading about dev team internal politics and drama is a big turn off.

Again, an emotive value judgement.  You go on to criticise the way in which Kindred responded to you, yet you are using similar, if not worse, language here.  How you conduct yourself and your choice of words often strongly influences how others respond to you.  It is, therefore, unwise to make such hostile remarks if you don't wish to be treated in a negative way yourself.

Let's continue to your second post in this topic:

Devs, team members, whatever.

Whatever indicates disrespect and a misunderstanding of team structures.  This suggests an overall couldn't care less attitude on your part.  If you had wanted to be constructive with your criticism, you could have taken the time to formulate this better and to research how the Team actually works.

Quote
You represent the whole SMF organization to the newcomer and you just spat on my face and start doing semantics. Who are you to call someone "idiot"? Are you a better person? You, sir, are a neckbeard and not a gentleman. Hows that for an insult?

You accuse Kindred of being rude, and decide to be rude back.  If you feel a Team member, or anyone else here, is out of line, the report to moderator button is how to proceed.  Fighting fire with fire does not work, and it is not going to be allowed to continue, as I will come to at the end of my post.

Quote
Here's a free tip: stop calling your community "whiners". What an absolutely horrible, elitist and condescending paternalistic approach.

Yet, you used the very same word when referring to the community in your first post in this topic. You thus present yourself as being someone who does practise what he preaches.

As a final note to you, please avoid responding to any of my points.  They are purely for you to reflect on.  You may well disagree, but this this topic is not the place to express any more of these views, as you will see in my moderation note at the end of this post.

As for new support staff, there are two ways of hiring: Either get people to apply or promote them. Both solutions requires a group of staff to review the potential staff to see if they're worthy enough as support staff to be added.

We already have systems in place on the Team for recruiting new members.  The problem is that there are almost no suitable candidates who are available to join the Team at this time.  To respond to your earlier comment, as it's related to this, the lack of personnel is the major factor as to why development on 2.1 cannot be speeded up.  There simply are not enough personnel for it to go any faster.



This final comment is for everyone posting in , thinking of posting in, or reading this topic.  There will be no more allowances for insulting, flaming, flame baiting, trolling, or any other type of behaviour similar to this.  The topic is supposed to be for cordial discussion about the future development of SMF, and this is what it is going to return to.

Anyone who has issues with how someone is posting here needs to use the report to moderator button, and not to get involved in personal attacks or respond to what they perceive to be a personal attack.  The report to moderator button is there to handle these issues.  Please use it.

Any posts which are adjudged to be in breach of the standard expected will be deleted without notification and members who consistently break these etiquette rules will be warned.

I hope that makes thing clear.

Please now return to civil and cordial discussion of SMF's future development.  Thank you :).
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on June 05, 2016, 08:21:25 AM
The GitHub repo is transparent, but only to people who knows PHP. If you don't know PHP then it's kinda hard to scan through the history to figure out what part of the SMF that got fixed or if something new got implemented.

We are using release topics to reflect what changed (not every minor detail). Also you can check PRs (merged), they are mostly for fixing specific issues and details themselves as "fixing #abc" (https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/pull/3466).

and if you don't want to create addition account for GitHub just to report issues, you can always use our bug board we'll gladly mirror it to github. :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on June 05, 2016, 08:47:25 PM
As a general response, please keep in mind that everyone that is attached to SMF is a volunteer. They don't get paid and do what they can in their free time. Trying to enforce deadlines and milestones against a project with few contributors and erratic schedules will cause problems. As was mentioned, it was tried before and found to be a huge failure.

Some of the curtness/rudeness comes from being asked thousands of times about schedules and having to deal with an entitled attitude from hundreds of those folks. You cannot believe how tiring it is to respond to randos demanding releases, criticizing how things are run and otherwise screaming for you to dedicate some of your project free time to them all without any intention of giving back.

If you want to make releases happen faster, look over reported bugs and find ones without test cases (a set of steps to reproduce) and add this. Look over the support boards and answer some questions that you can solve. Learn a bit of coding to try and help with superficial bugs. If you see something being done inefficiently, make a suggestion on how to improve that thing and help switch the system to your idea. Do something or anything to increase the people that are working on this project so everyone has a lighter load so more can be done. As John Heywood once wrote: many hands make light work.


Oh yeah and one more thing, for crying out loud, update these forums, they're your calling card and a potential new users cannot even register because of your antiquated verification system (ReCaptcha, there's a mod for it)! Create some confidence in your community instead of bullying them.

Yes, the internal system is antiquated. Unfortunately, it's the best we have for a multi-language forum where we don't like to depend on external services that can change with little to no notice.

The issue with reCAPTCHA is that it's been broken (in the word typing form) for some time now. It's somewhat useful as a very small hurdle, but when you have human-backed services that charge $1.00 US for 1000 valid solutions, it's pretty easy to break most OCR-style barriers. This isn't a new problem, either. It's been going on for over eight years (http://www.zdnet.com/article/inside-indias-captcha-solving-economy/). Yes, that article was written in 2008, and the services catering to spammers have only gotten cheaper and better. Some of the more recent changes to reCAPTCHA like behavior-based analysis and image choosing are attempts to make such services much more expensive to run.

The ideal anti-spam solution is custom question/answer sets that are specific to the forum's focus. Such a thing should keep spam posters down to a manageable amount. Unfortunately, that is mostly useful when you only have members that will share a single language. Such a solution is thus impossible here.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Grammy on June 06, 2016, 08:55:22 AM
I just sat here and read this whole thread and I guess I'm surprised. 

I mean....  SMF is a free gift.  I'm trying to think how someone would feel if they gave me a present and, as soon as I unwrapped it, I began bawling them out because it wasn't exactly as I wanted it to be.  Wow...  I'd be a jerk.

I guess I'm pretty naive.  I just think gifts are....  well, gifts. 




(Moving on elsewhere, since I talk too much.)   :D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: albertlast on June 16, 2016, 02:13:36 AM
I don't find that github is realy transparent,
to make the issue list empty should be not target (you will never archive this)
When you look at the amount of commits https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/releases
than you notice that between beta 1 and beta 2 are ~700 commits and between beta 2 and now ~1400 commits

Based on this information the develop should already by beta 4.

i think the idea "a beta release need to be more stable as normale beta version" should be dead.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: 青山 素子 on June 17, 2016, 12:11:39 PM
I don't find that github is realy transparent,

I guess it depends on what kind of transparency you want. As you go on to show, it's very transparent as to the development process.

to make the issue list empty should be not target (you will never archive this)

Honestly, the overall goal should always be to have 0 bugs. As long as you realize that this isn't a realistic goal if you want to release, you should be doing fine. I expect the developers understand this and have prioritized bugs appropriately.

When you look at the amount of commits https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/releases
than you notice that between beta 1 and beta 2 are ~700 commits and between beta 2 and now ~1400 commits

Based on this information the develop should already by beta 4.

Raw bug count is an awful metric for this. It ignores the type and actual amount of work covered by the commits. It's entirely possible that the more recent commits have a smaller impact than the early 700, as they are focused on specific bugs. Or they could all have similar impact. It's impossible to know without investigating the commits in detail.

i think the idea "a beta release need to be more stable as normale beta version" should be dead.

I don't recall anyone specifically stating this. It might be because it makes no sense. A beta is a beta. If you're talking about the code at any one time in the repository, that is not a beta, it's simply in-development code.

Now, actual normal releases should be more stable than a beta simply by the fact that the beta and release candidate process should have been able to reduce the number and impact of bugs.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on July 06, 2016, 08:20:57 PM
As a general response, please keep in mind that everyone that is attached to SMF is a volunteer.

Some can be called rudeOteers (yet another attempt at creating a new English language word).  Alas I believe the leader of the rudeOteers has gone to greener pastures.  :)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on July 06, 2016, 10:50:59 PM
As a general response, please keep in mind that everyone that is attached to SMF is a volunteer.

Some can be called rudeOteers (yet another attempt at creating a new English language word).  Alas I believe the leader of the rudeOteers has gone to greener pastures.  :)

Hate to disappoint you but I'm still around  ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on July 07, 2016, 01:32:11 PM
I thought he'd left but it seems he's back, offering his "opinions".
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: d3vcho(); on July 07, 2016, 01:38:14 PM
I still think that social media would be useful in order to reach more people (users, developers who may help and who knows who else).
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on July 07, 2016, 03:02:04 PM
It actually isn't as useful as you'd think given the specific nature of forums and the generic nature of Facebook etc.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: d3vcho(); on July 08, 2016, 03:01:46 PM
It actually isn't as useful as you'd think given the specific nature of forums and the generic nature of Facebook etc.


Anyway everything is helpful. It isn't necessary to stay all the day long focused on social media, but posting a few things per week should be enough for people like me who say social media are inactive. It's my point of view.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on July 31, 2016, 01:22:03 PM
I thought he'd left but it seems he's back, offering his "opinions".

I love you too! :-*

 Just when I thought it was safe the leader returns! 
  :) O:)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 01, 2016, 12:37:33 AM
And it seems you also can't tell when I'm being extremely self deprecating and referring to the fact I'd made a return offering my "opinions" ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: butchs on August 06, 2016, 07:43:42 AM
You make me laugh....   ;D
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 06, 2016, 08:04:59 AM
I do my very best *bows*
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Bloc on August 11, 2016, 05:01:39 AM
Generally - or specifically if thats easier - whats the main issues holding back a stable 2.1?

I've looked through the issues list(135 and counting) and a lot of these seems to be more of suggestions, or bugs that haven't been confirmed?

Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on August 11, 2016, 05:36:48 AM
Generally - or specifically if thats easier - whats the main issues holding back a stable 2.1?

I've looked through the issues list(135 and counting) and a lot of these seems to be more of suggestions, or bugs that haven't been confirmed?



I have pretty much same opinion about the list as well. The best start with issues tagged with a milestone.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Irisado on August 11, 2016, 05:55:19 AM
Generally - or specifically if thats easier - whats the main issues holding back a stable 2.1?

The utf8 upgrade issue.  A solution to this is still to be found.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 11, 2016, 06:35:24 AM
What exactly is the issue?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on August 11, 2016, 06:41:01 AM
What exactly is the issue?

If you run upgrade.php via browser, convertUTF8 part not running. No problem if you run the upgrade via command line.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Bloc on August 11, 2016, 09:00:04 AM
It will stop the conversion no matter what - or just in certain conditions(large database etc.)?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Illori on August 11, 2016, 09:10:54 AM
it does not convert at all no matter the size of the db, like that part of the script does not run at all. the rest of upgrading finishes without issue.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: equinoxmatt on August 24, 2016, 07:30:22 PM
Just a thought,  whilst I appreciate you are all voulenteers, which is commendable, who is 'in charge'.   e.g,  who is making the decisions how to define 2.1 as 'release ready'.  What is the criteria?  0 issues on github?  A certain set of features left to be implemented?

As much as projects take time,  I can't help but feel there is something going wrong in the whole management of the project.  If you don't have a clearly defined goal,  you are never going to get anywhere.

NOTE:  This captcha is absolutely appalling.  I had to listen to the damn thing.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on August 24, 2016, 07:44:06 PM
Just a thought,  whilst I appreciate you are all voulenteers, which is commendable, who is 'in charge'.   e.g,  who is making the decisions how to define 2.1 as 'release ready'.  What is the criteria?  0 issues on github?  A certain set of features left to be implemented?

As much as projects take time,  I can't help but feel there is something going wrong in the whole management of the project.  If you don't have a clearly defined goal,  you are never going to get anywhere.

NOTE:  This captcha is absolutely appalling.  I had to listen to the damn thing.

I'm sad to hear you feel that way. Team is not working on "whatever" bases we have our priorities. You can check GitHub for better information.

https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/issues | https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/milestones
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: feline on August 24, 2016, 07:45:15 PM
If you don't have a clearly defined goal,  you are never going to get anywhere.
spoken a true word left  ;)
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: equinoxmatt on August 25, 2016, 07:34:18 AM
Just a thought,  whilst I appreciate you are all voulenteers, which is commendable, who is 'in charge'.   e.g,  who is making the decisions how to define 2.1 as 'release ready'.  What is the criteria?  0 issues on github?  A certain set of features left to be implemented?

As much as projects take time,  I can't help but feel there is something going wrong in the whole management of the project.  If you don't have a clearly defined goal,  you are never going to get anywhere.

NOTE:  This captcha is absolutely appalling.  I had to listen to the damn thing.

I'm sad to hear you feel that way. Team is not working on "whatever" bases we have our priorities. You can check GitHub for better information.

https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/issues | https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/milestones

Hi Antes,

I am fully aware of Github and I can see the issues/commits being made.  Are the milestones accurate?  If the issues list is up to date with the necessary tags that is fine. 

Just to clarify,  I am an experienced PHP developer and I intend to start making commits and patches.  I am not just here just to moan, intend to contribute.  I will post more questions in the 2.1 progression thread.

Can anyone do anything about this Captcha?  It is really, really p*ssing me off.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 25, 2016, 07:40:12 AM
the Captcha goes away after 5 or maybe 10 posts.
Sorry... until 2.1 is out, it is really our only defense against spam autoposters - even if it's not the best defense.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: equinoxmatt on August 25, 2016, 07:45:39 AM
the Captcha goes away after 5 or maybe 10 posts.
Sorry... until 2.1 is out, it is really our only defense against spam autoposters - even if it's not the best defense.

Thanks Kindred.  I was hoping there might be a better way.  As you said, it should go away soon.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 25, 2016, 08:05:12 AM
yeah, the issue is that multi-language questions are needed for this site to replace the Captcha
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: equinoxmatt on August 25, 2016, 08:14:48 AM
Could you not use the Google ReCaptcha project? The 'I am not a robot' tickbox works really well!
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Illori on August 25, 2016, 08:26:54 AM
Could you not use the Google ReCaptcha project? The 'I am not a robot' tickbox works really well!

we try not to install mods on this forum due to our setup and trying to showcase the forum as close to default as possible.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: equinoxmatt on August 25, 2016, 08:34:18 AM
Could you not use the Google ReCaptcha project? The 'I am not a robot' tickbox works really well!

we try not to install mods on this forum due to our setup and trying to showcase the forum as close to default as possible.

Fair enough.  I have met some bad captcha in my time,  this is near the top of the list.  Is their any plans to replace it in 2.1?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: equinoxmatt on August 25, 2016, 08:42:44 AM
Is Mantis still being used?

What happened to SMF 3.0? Dead?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on August 25, 2016, 08:44:09 AM
no, Mantis is not being used. GitHub is the repository and tracker.

SMF 3.0 is on tap, for AFTER 2.1
Unfortunately, we do not have the manpower to work on both at the same time
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Antes on August 25, 2016, 08:53:18 AM
Just a thought,  whilst I appreciate you are all voulenteers, which is commendable, who is 'in charge'.   e.g,  who is making the decisions how to define 2.1 as 'release ready'.  What is the criteria?  0 issues on github?  A certain set of features left to be implemented?

As much as projects take time,  I can't help but feel there is something going wrong in the whole management of the project.  If you don't have a clearly defined goal,  you are never going to get anywhere.

NOTE:  This captcha is absolutely appalling.  I had to listen to the damn thing.

I'm sad to hear you feel that way. Team is not working on "whatever" bases we have our priorities. You can check GitHub for better information.

https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/issues | https://github.com/SimpleMachines/SMF2.1/milestones

Hi Antes,

I am fully aware of Github and I can see the issues/commits being made.  Are the milestones accurate?  If the issues list is up to date with the necessary tags that is fine. 

Just to clarify,  I am an experienced PHP developer and I intend to start making commits and patches.  I am not just here just to moan, intend to contribute.  I will post more questions in the 2.1 progression thread.

Can anyone do anything about this Captcha?  It is really, really p*ssing me off.
I'm so happy to see you want to contribute to the project. Yes all issues are up-to-date and they are still in the software so any issue you pick from the list (milestone) is valid.

Unfortunately we have to setup some defense to prevent bots to crawl the place with spam. Currently we don't have any better solution. yet team friends already answered your questions as much. About G-ReCaptcha afaik its also cracked as well so its not better than current captcha.

Is Mantis still being used?

What happened to SMF 3.0? Dead?

Mantis is way too old, and its currently in read-only mod. We are moving to GitHub as much as possible.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: equinoxmatt on August 25, 2016, 10:05:56 AM
Understandable why SMF 3.0 is on hold.  Getting 2.1 out the door is a priority.

I will probably jump on IRC later and get a fork and start looking into issues.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 25, 2016, 12:57:05 PM
You guys know you can do multi language Q&A in 2.0 right?

The guy who did it for 2.1 even back ported the actual 2.1 code specifically for 2.0 and it's on the mod site. And has been for two years?
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Suki on August 25, 2016, 01:06:41 PM
Yes.  Can and want are two different things though, we can, we don't want.

Besides the "vanilla" approach, theres also the maintenance of this site. More mods == more maintenance. Big site and all that stuff.

Theres also the thing with upgrading, the upgrade process to 2.1 gets closer, the more closer it gets the more ineffective will be adding mods that are already features on 2.1
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on August 25, 2016, 01:40:43 PM
I just thought mitigating user complaints for a feature that should cleanly upgrade would have been a good idea.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: palmdoc on October 04, 2018, 05:46:16 PM
Wow, 2 years old thread.
Makes me wonder when 2.1 will come out of beta?
Thank you to the Devs for all your hard work and time.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Deaks on October 04, 2018, 07:11:03 PM
Wow, 2 years old thread.
Makes me wonder when 2.1 will come out of beta?
Thank you to the Devs for all your hard work and time.

My maths must be wrong, initial post was made "February 24, 2012" im sure that is now well over 6 years :/
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on October 05, 2018, 01:50:18 AM
and the answer to the question is (as always)....  when we deem it to be ready to be out of beta. :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Arantor on October 05, 2018, 02:49:00 AM
I find it really funny that the point two years ago about the CAPTCHA and not putting mods on here because they’ll be in 2.1 was since overruled because this site has reCAPTCHA now, just like 2.1.
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Kindred on October 05, 2018, 11:29:07 AM
well, over time, requirements, specs and even opinions can change. :P
Title: Re: The future of SMF
Post by: Bloc on October 05, 2018, 05:59:31 PM
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance. " - Confucius

8)