Topic: When is a mod considered abandoned?

[Rumbaar]

Well AmaZulu your issue is more of a personal forum configuration issue than a fault of that particular mod.  95% of mods are only written to support 'plain' English, that is across all mods.

As I say to all people that have installed from Fantastico (I've assumed here) set your server language to English, and you'll solve 98% of language missing issues.

[AmaZulu]

Problem with using plain English is that non-English characters like ø and é and ü î get warbled into unintelligible jetsam and my European members get agitated when their names can't be spelt properly on my forum.

Anyway, like I said that's not a biggie to sort out. The main purpose of my post was to add a voice for the publication of the revised mod. No one wants to wade through 81 pages of issues to try and sort things out when there is a better mod available.

[Rumbaar]

True, I understand you concern in that area.  But to link it to non utf8 (faux or legit) support, which is the case for nearly ALL (or a very large percentage) mods, isn't the way to do it

[karlbenson]

95% of mods are only written to support 'plain' English, that is across all mods.

I try to provide support for both standard and utf8 for all translated language strings within my mods.

I personally don't see the harm in having two similar types of mods.

[AmaZulu]

True, I understand you concern in that area.  But to link it to non utf8 (faux or legit) support, which is the case for nearly ALL (or a very large percentage) mods, isn't the way to do it

I agree & only just realised that it was kind of irrelevant to include it in my reason for posting.

(It would be nice though if all the fantastic mods you guys did for us took UTF8 into account though. )

[Rumbaar]

I try to provide support for both standard and utf8 for all translated language strings within my mods.

I personally don't see the harm in having two similar types of mods.

Yes you do Karlbenson, your mods are fantastically written.

That reminds me, what I wanted to bring up in regards to this discussion.
Take a look at View Topic Permission to see how it was possible to have very similar mods created a long time after the first still allowed into the mod site.   Just seems strange with the current issue, that is all.

[karlbenson]

Just search for Shoutbox and theres 4.

[Rumbaar]

Yeah, thats true.  Which can be nightmare when people request support on their 'shoutbox' mod...

[capabmx]

Also, as a little point of advice. I notice a decent amount of people have problems with mods that have not been updated for 1.1.4. Usually you can get away with editing a small line to make it compatible. Simply download the package, and extract it to it's package name. Then open the folder and look for install.xml, or a file similar. I recommend downloading notepad 2, google search. Then open it and look for this line of code:

Code: [Select]

<install for="1.1 RC3, 1.1 - 1.1.3"> . It will be similar most likely. Some times you can get away with just changing the 1.1.3 to 1.1.4. Also remember to do this for the uninstall line. It is no big feat or anything, I just figure instead of having a bunch of people asking mod developers to update them, they can do it themselved sometimes, so the developers can continue working on anything else until they have the time to update. Haha if this is of no help I can see why, because it is pretty much elementary compared to a lot of other things. But hey, for a second I feel like I'm being a help lol. And also I agree there are a lot of very similar mods, in fact some mods are exactly the same.

There are two select language upon registration mods, the shoutbox mods are all over the place, haha. Multiple flash bbc mods, and the blogs, it gets sort of confusing.

[青山 素子]

You can also add "version_emulate=XXXX" in the URL for the package manager. Replace XXXX with the latest version the mod reports being compatible with. If there are no errors, it should install fine.

This avoids having to unpack mods and edit them.

[capabmx]

Hey, I like doing it the hard way  , just kidding. I wish I would've known that this whole time haha thanks!

[Bulakbol]

Would it be better to move all unsupported mods to the archive section and let anyone to grab and update to work for the current version of SMF and re-distribute it?

[Dannii]

Would it be better to move all unsupported mods to the archive section and let anyone to grab and update to work for the current version of SMF and re-distribute it?

It may be better, but it wouldn't be legal.

[rsw686]

Would it be better to move all unsupported mods to the archive section and let anyone to grab and update to work for the current version of SMF and re-distribute it?

What would be neat is for 2.0 to create a mod CVS. At first mods are just submitted and reviewed. Anybody can submit patches for these mods. After you submit x patches you are allowed commit access. This would encourage development on the mods and expand the feature set. I know I have come across many mods with slight issues.

[Dannii]

Something like a forge is in planned for the distant future. It would indeed be a good idea, although we'd need to limit the licences of mods on the mod site to do that.

[rsw686]

Something like a forge is in planned for the distant future. It would indeed be a good idea, although we'd need to limit the licences of mods on the mod site to do that.

Yeah the licensing could be an issue. However I really don't see the problem as the mods only work with SMF. People would just have to accept whatever licensing was chosen if they wanted to essentially donate their work for others to benefit from. Its already done like this at countless other open source projects. In the end the quality of the mods would improve even if there weren't as many to start.