I don't think it should be encoded

[Grant]

I think 3.0 is going to be encoded anyway. Don't expect to have readable source forever.

[Mat Barrie]

I think 3.0 is going to be encoded anyway. Don't expect to have readable source forever.

Ok, let's not speculate on that, I can guarantee that will turn into an argument between the pro- and anti-encoding crowds.

[UBERHOST.NET]

I think 3.0 is going to be encoded anyway. Don't expect to have readable source forever.

[Quillz]

I think 3.0 is going to be encoded anyway. Don't expect to have readable source forever.

I don't think so. :)

[Guest]

What in the world are you talking about?

What exactly is it that you don't understand in my post?

I don't understand the big deal people, we have what 25 days with an encoded version ( Oct 15, 2006 ), is it that big of a deal?

It is if you can't install it, because the installer doesn't recognize it's supposed to use mysql.

[RaDiOAcTiVe]

It's a rough guess. ;) Give or take, I would imagine it is in the tens of thousands of lines of code range.

TENS OF THOUSANDS??? WOW. IPS must be a powerhouse :P :D

[Dark Phantom]

What exactly is it that you don't understand in my post?

It is if you can't install it, because the installer doesn't recognize it's supposed to use mysql.

You lost me when you said:

I disagree with that, how are we able to spot errors in the code when we don't see the code. Encoding it basically enlongs the testing process and will probably let slip through some bugs that would've been otherwise noted.

1) Its not our job to find bugs in the code, just bugs as a user.
2) Think this as your testing Office, you test the user interface, since thats what 99.9% people are worried about when there is a bug.
3) The final release itself won't be encoded, so you can submit these magical bugs you think that will exist then.

I think 3.0 is going to be encoded anyway. Don't expect to have readable source forever.

This isn't going to happen, Invision Power Services knows the reason people like to view the source is to add modifications, doing so would only hurt their bottom line. They gain nothing from doing so, since encoding the code isn't 100% protected, event a 5% drop in their sales because of it is not worth it.

A Beta, is a different story, they explained why they did this, its so people don't expect support for a Beta release.

[Guest]

You lost me when you said:

1) Its not our job to find bugs in the code, just bugs as a user.

2) Think this as your testing Office, you test the user interface, since thats what 99.9% people are worried about when there is a bug.

3) The final release itself won't be encoded, so you can submit these magical bugs you think that will exist then.

it's not our job to test ipb in the first place, nor from a user point, nor from a code viewpoint, being able to see the code just adds an extra view on possible problems/insecurities...

[bfarber]

Let's not speculate on IPB 3.0 being encoded or not. It's a moot point right now, as we're only in beta stages of 2.2 :)

You can view the code when 2.2 is released in RC stages before it goes final. As someone else said - if you spot bugs in the code itself, submit them then. This is really a more peculiar situation though, because a "bug in the code" doesn't really matter if it doesn't affect you when using the software.

[Cool Surfer]

This is really a more peculiar situation though, because a "bug in the code" doesn't really matter if it doesn't affect you when using the software.

I agree with BF.

How would a non code writer know that a particular code is a bug?
Bug is something that user come to know after they use the software
and not by reading the code. <_<

[Microo]

I agree with BF.

How would a non code writer know that a particular code is a bug?

Bug is something that user come to know after they use the software

and not by reading the code. <_<

Word, you don

[Guest]

sigh, I will even stop trying to explain it.

[Mark]

I don't think so. :)

Sorry to bring this up again, I recall one of the female IPS Management members saying that all IPS products will one day be encoded. I will look for this post now....

[Charles]

Sorry to bring this up again, I recall one of the female IPS Management members saying that

all

IPS products will one day be encoded. I will look for this post now....

If that was ever said it was probably a misunderstanding.

[Mark]

IP.Dynamic, Nexus and other future products will in fact be encoded (Ioncube and Zend versions will be available.)

[ellawella]

Lindy isn't female...for the last time :lol:

And yay, I'm "Spam Happy" now.

[• Jay •]

Love your signature, Professor P. Irony turns me on. :blush:

[Charles]

Ah yes well that is indeed true for those products. But we're very off topic now :)

[Mark]

Lindy isn't female...for the last time laughing.gif

And yay, I'm "Spam Happy" now.

I'm sorry - I never knew that! (Sorry Lindy!) I have never heard of that being a male name. I am officially embarassed.

Love your signature, Professor P. Irony turns me on. blushing.gif

I know, it's great! I annoy myself most of the time. I think I'll change that actually....

Ah yes well that is indeed true for those products. But we're very off topic now original.gif

Can you split these posts? It's quite an interesting topic.
When you say "those products" - what do you mean? Lindy said "future products" - to me, that means <IPB2.1

[Lindy]

You're embarassed? You should live with a name like "Lindy" :D

I said "other future products" - I did not mean to imply everything we ever do ever again. I apologize for the confusion.

[riven3d]

future products would mean something that is not currently out. 2.2 would not be considered a new product because in all reality it isnt, its just a new version to an existing product

[Mark]

You're embarassed? You should live with a name like "Lindy" :D

I said "other future products" - I did not mean to imply everything we ever do ever again. I apologize for the confusion.

lol - sorry about that (maybe the online icon in post view can be replaced with the gender one - or maybe combine the two)

OK - I assumed "other future products" mean all future products.

future products would mean something that is not currently out. 2.2 would not be considered a new product because in all reality it isnt, its just a new version to an existing product

Yes, I misunderstood. An easy mistake IMO

[• Jay •]

I'm sorry - I never knew that! (Sorry Lindy!) I have never heard of that being a male name. I am officially embarassed.

Blame his parents. He was named after Charles "Lucky Lindy" Lindbergh.

[Mark]

Now we really are offtopic

[• Jay •]

Now we

really

are offtopic

Nothing new any time I start posting.