Read the blogs!
Started by Grudge, December 29, 2005, 04:53:27 AM
Quote from: roxpace on June 17, 2006, 10:18:06 PMOwdy: RC1 came 2005-09-20,
Quote from: ComputerBob on June 17, 2006, 05:39:31 PMHow long has it been since RC2 was released? It seems like it's been about a year to me.
Quote from: ComputerBob on June 17, 2006, 05:55:40 PMExactly. Like many others, I gave up on waiting for phpBB 2.2 a long, long, long time ago. That's why I looked around for an alternative and found SMF. But it seems like SMF 1.1 has already been in RC (either RC1 or RC2) for a long, long, long time without any "light at the end of the tunnel."
Quote from: JayBachatero on June 17, 2006, 12:37:12 PMOrange you picked the wrong Company to talk about Road Map. When was Vista "supposed" to be out?...If we would've given you a timeline we would be way behind then. Like Grudge stated before. He thought 1.1 Final would be out by April and look. That's why we don't have a time line.Like we said before. Not even Team Members know exactly when it will be released. He get an idea a week before when we prepare the Announcement topic. Then we are just like you guys. We wake up to see a mess of people downloadingg x cause it was released. The same happened with RC2.QuoteA new problem would arise, someone have to verify each contributed scriptRox you hit the nail right on the head. That is something that we don't want. Supporting different versions becomes a hastle.
QuoteA new problem would arise, someone have to verify each contributed script
Quote from: klumy on June 17, 2006, 05:48:14 PM@ComputerBob How long have you been waiting for phpBB 2.2?Think the phpBB development must be much longer
Quote from: ComputerBob on June 18, 2006, 02:10:48 PMDigg has an announcement about the new phpBB 3 Beta 1:http://digg.com/software/PhpBB_3_Beta_1_Released [nofollow]I wouldn't be posting a link to a phpBB announcement here in the SMF forums except that I'd like to see how SMF users feel about a very anti-SMF comment under the announcement. ATM it's the 27th comment down, by JessicaHope, and starts with the text,"Oh please. I reported four diffrent security problems to SMF..."
Quote from: Jessica on June 18, 2006, 02:24:06 PMWell, mabey if SMF team members didn't troll the topic about phpBB, one wouldn't have to reply as one did. However, if you don't like what I posted, then fine, but it is truth.Jessica
Quote from: ComputerBob on June 18, 2006, 02:35:36 PMJessica, you don't need to get huffy about it.
Quote from: J J Williams on June 18, 2006, 03:24:38 PMYou do know just cause someone's in one team doesn't mean they know nothing about another thing
Quote from: Jessica on June 18, 2006, 03:18:43 PMQuote from: ComputerBob on June 18, 2006, 02:35:36 PMJessica, you don't need to get huffy about it.I didn't, I simply stated fact. Trekkie101 has affiliation with the SMF group as he is on their documentation team. It does not shed good light on to the SMF group to have one of their team members attempt to troll a discussion about phpBB 3 by saying things like SMF has a better security record. Regardless of if it is true or not, it doesn't belong in such a discussion, and really should not be posted by a SMF team member.
Quote from: ComputerBobYour post here, which quoted me, did not mention Trekkie 101, and I don't know anything about the SMF team, so it appeared to me that you were accusing me of trolling the phpBB thread.
Quote from: Jessica on June 18, 2006, 04:17:18 PMI'm very sorry if it appeared that way Jessica