Social Login

[glennk]

Sorry to find out the last topic I commented in about social login was closed. I couldnt see any problems with the debate that led to it being closed. If your not going to listen to your readers and users then whats the point ??

If any of you are interested the forum software I spoke of with social login in the core is Woltlab. New upcoming, very modern looking with all the features required for the future regular updates with new features.

In 2014 Social login as an option is essential. Without wanting to be overly nagative about SMF, this software is getting left behind. I have 2 large forums set up on smf and if it wasnt soo frightening to move them I would have done it a long time back. This software doesnt even have a mobile or responsive theme as yet and when you ask about when one is coming they close your topic and tell you not to ask.

Is this how to create user satisfaction ??

[Arantor]

And the reasons that causes SMF to choose not to include it have not changed any. The maintenance burden alone on the volunteer developers is considerable.

As for the previous debate, that was locked by its topic starter because he didn't get an answer he liked (which is for someone to spend many many many hours making something for him for free), not by the team.

[Kindred]

There are several responsive themes available on the theme download site... And 2.1 has a responsive theme as default.

As for social login...   Exactly what Arantor said...   We have said the same thing several hundred times, so it gets tiresome when people think that THEY deserve special treatment because THEY want something.   You want it? Code it! Social login belongs as a mod... Period. Much easier to update than the core... Especially when idiot coders like Facebook keep changing their API.

Oh, and woltlab is burning board...    And everything done in that, that I can see, can be done in smf with themes and mods.

[glennk]

I dont think I deserve special treatment, I believe all your users deserve a civil reply though. I asked about 2.1 and potential release date. Nothing specific just a basic idea on how long, A month, 6 months, a year ? I was told never to ask and my topic was closed.

In 2014 a responsive theme at the very least is essential. To be told not to ask and have your topic closed is not good. Im not asking for any special treatment just a basic idea on whats happening.

I also still believe socail login is an essential requirement in modern times. If woltlab can provide it why not smf.

[Arantor]

Correct, because you cannot get an answer. You are waiting for four people, working in their spare time, to make something. It will be done when it is done, and no meaningful answer can be given just for that reason. And when we get asked it weekly, having to repeat this is extremely tiresome.

Yes, we agree about a responsive theme. 2.1 has one.

We do not agree about social login, and were it to be implemented expect releases much much more often solely for maintenance, taking the little time devs have away from making anything new and interesting. Remember, these people are spending their time making this. They are not paid. They do it around their jobs and lives.

Edit, actually yes you were asking for special treatment. It is stated quite clearly in the 2.1 board that discussions about its release will be closed. See the board description:

Also, there will be NO DATES discussed on this board - so don't ask.

[Suki]

There is a lot of misunderstandings here. A lot of different issues been mixed up too.

Indeed there was nothing wrong or nothing debatable on that topic for it been locked, alas, it was the OP's decision to close it, not SMF's. People closing their own topics by their own free will doesn't constitute nor can be seen as censorship from SMF or the SMF team members nor it constitute a negative to listen to what other people has to say or their right to been hear as a customer. Its important to make that clear.

When you make an opinion on a public forum, it is expected to receive some kind of response for it, thats the way communication works, if you want to be hear then be prepare to listen to whatever response you might get.

Point two. No one is against social login, at least not that adamantly, despise of my very own personal beliefs about privacy, I wouldn't mind working on something like that, so no, from a pure "company" perspective, no one is against implementing something like this.

There is reticence on actually implement it and there are too many reasons for that, this also covers your question:

If woltlab can provide it why not smf.

- SMF is not a business entity. SMF's human resources is limited and scarce, thus, the way we handle those resources has to be more cleaver than a regular for profit entity.

- Facebook and Twitter employs way more people than they really need, so their solution to that is to simply putting their coding people into reinventing the wheel over and over again every 2 or 3 months. For profit gaining companies, or rather for people who code for profit gaining companies, this isn't that much an issue, its your job, you have to do it, you get pay for it, thats what you do for living, you don't have to worry about other things while you do it. It actually helps you to keep up your job, if Facebook and Twitter didn't change their APIs so often a lot of people would lose their jobs, how ironic is that

Yes, yes, of course there are ways to mitigate the annoyance of having to deal with the constant changes on their APIs, I'm well aware of that.

- Since we don't have that much human resources available, we have to prioritize what we have. What you miss when you say: "you don't listening to me" is that there are other customers who also believes X or Y features are essential for their needs and they have as much "right" to be heard as you.

It is our job to decide which features gets attention based on a bunch of factors:

- feasibility
- demand
- time for implementation
- server impact
- blend it with existing codebase
- maintenance

Pretty much like any other company except we do it on a much more limited way. Social login is one of those features that didn't met the cut, so to speak. This doesn't mean its a bad features or that we don't want it, it just means that for our very specific purposes and goals, it is not feasible to implement something like that.

This is the way we create user satisfaction, not optimal but it is what we got and what it works best for our limits and the customer's needs.

So please, next time you feel SMF isn't listening to you, try looking at it from another perspective.


Point three.

In 2014 a responsive theme at the very least is essential. To be told not to ask and have your topic closed is not good. Im not asking for any special treatment just a basic idea on whats happening.

This are two issues been mixed up.

A responsive theme.
A release date.

The first one has already been answered by many people on many occasions: 2.1 has a responsive theme by default, 2.0 has some responsive designs available as themes.

The release data is something that has never been made publicly, it causes way too much issues and hassles, here is a quick anecdote for 2.1 that happen a few months ago:

There was this guy who kept on asking for a release date (and demanding SMF to become a Xenforo clone for free) and kept on bothering another dev on another forum about it, this dev gave a vague estimation date to him, as a friend, off-record, while casual chatting, on a private message. When the estimated date wasn't met, this guy begun rampant about how SMF didn't met their "official release date" and other atrocities so out of context.

Theres similar cases for other releases been made before. A lose/lose/lose/lose situation for us, bad if we don't give a date, bad if we give a date and miss it, bad if we met the date and got burned out, bad if we don't met the date and still got burned out.

Since this isn't a company and we don't work 8h/6d, we cannot made a realistic date estimation even if we wanted to. So many things can happen when working on your free time, there is no scheduled time for SMF.

So yeah, the civil way to handle all of that is simply putting it straight forward:

Also, there will be NO DATES discussed on this board - so don't ask.

Which is what happen with your topic and has nothing to do with not been hear or been shut down whenever you ask something. The warning is there already, if you decide to bypass it, it means you already understood the consequences and are totally fine with it. Hence the lock.

If you are curios about the whole process why don't you try another approach to it?  why no begun to visit SMF's repo page at github, that page has a lot of data and info and you don't even have to register over there.

Why not been proactive rather than reactive? This isn't a closed company, this is an open source project where everyone can be involved if they desire to do so.

Lastly, this kind of lengthy responses has to be made every single time a person ask about this. Every person feels entitled and "special". If they just could spend a few minutes and read the 2.1's board description or go visit the repo page I wouldn't have to spend code time into this kind of responses (since, apparently, you aren't acquiescent
with the responses qualified people has given to you already), in reality and as ironic and cliché as it sounds: asking for a release date actually delays the release date.

Anyway, thats as civil as I can get on a Sunday morning hope is enough for you, otherwise please try to keep the different issues separately so they can be handle better. I see no reasons for this to be locked other than your inquiries been answered already but do please feel free to add anything you might want to add.

On a totally different note, I dunno why this got derailed from a mod request...

[DenDen60]

Can I suggest that a "Development FAQ" be created?

This way a lot of members could find out what they want without asking questions and developer/ support specialist could refer to the Development FAQ when questions are asked and answers are there.

SMF developers and Support specialist could include in in their signature "Please refer to the Development FAQ for questions about SMF's future development  ". 

[Kindred]

well....e xcept for the fact that the answers, 99.9% of the time are just "no. no and more no"

[DenDen60]

well....e xcept for the fact that the answers, 99.9% of the time are just "no. no and more no"

Then this is what the FAQ would show. It would still reduce the number of questions and responses.

[Arantor]

Evidence suggests this is not the case.

[Kindred]

given the already robust FAQ that we have, for general questions about the system -- and the fact that it has NOT reduced the number of questions asked outside the FAQ which are answered in that FAQ - I have to agree with Arantor.


We might, at some point...   but it's lower on the priority pole than 18-dozen other things

[Irisado]

Moved to Applied or Declined Requests, since this was a discussion about implementing social login as a core feature, not a mod request.

[DenDen60]

Of course no one must see this as a miracle solution. However, if it reduces the questions by 15%, 10% or even 5%, it is a productivity gain for everyone developers, supports staff and users alike.

[Arantor]

We have had a FAQ for years. No noticeable reduction has been observed yet.

Even 1% would be generous.

[DenDen60]

We have had a FAQ for years. No noticeable reduction has been observed yet.

Even 1% would be generous.

Arantor, Do you have numbers to back this statements? If you do, can you share them or send me a link to these stats

Also, the FAQ on the Manual section is not the same thing as a FAQ on future Development.

[Arantor]

I do not have the numbers to hand, I suspect you would not believe them even if I were inclined to obtain them and provide them to you.

And actually, in this case, there is no substantial difference. People will continue to ignore the information provided - as evidence in this very thread, people continue to ignore the fact that it is quite clearly stated 'do not ask for a release date', as has been reiterated for YEARS on this site, why would a FAQ suddenly change things?

No doubt you are about to rebuke me for being unconstructive but you really have not spent enough time here to be able to form a valid opinion on how this community will operate. I, however, have.

[Kindred]

yes, it is the same thing/extended, Denis....


With the addition of and frequent updates to the software FAQ, we SHOULD see a significant decrease in the number of questions which are answered in the FAQ. Evidence indicates the contrary. In general, people as their questions - regardless of the presence of the answer in the FAQ...   actually, regardless of the presence of the answer in a sticky post at the top of the very board they posted in.

Since software questions are asked much more frequently than development questions -- we can take the existing software FAQ as a baseline and determine that a development FAQ would have even less benefit - and we'd still have to be answering questions posted.

[DenDen60]

Alright then, and I am being the devils advocate here, would there be a way to develop a process by which users is forced to look at the FAQ before submitting. LinkedIn uses this approach and it seems to work well.

[Arantor]

You can lead horses to water, you cannot make them drink.
You can lead people to documentation, you cannot make them read it.

[DenDen60]

You can lead horses to water, you cannot make them drink.
You can lead people to documentation, you cannot make them read it.

don't you think this is a preconceived idea Arantor?