Breaking Skins with new Versions

[bfarber]

I agree that having to do skins in the web editor is pretty damn obnoxious. For the longest time I thought there had to be a way to do them in a regular text editor and it just wasn't documented. I'd much rather script emacs to do all the edits on all the skins at once.

Now that the ACP uses that ajax crap instead of of <textarea> none of the extensions for using external editors work. It's a pain in the ass.

The skinning editors may not work properly with external editors I suppose, but look at it from this perspective.

You're a power user - at least to the extent that you can work with html and php and such beyond a "find this and replace with this stage". That's great, I (personally) feel it's important to know some of these things if you're actually going to run a website.

The problem is a LARGE (VERY large) majority of our users are NOT power users, and barely know what a <b> tag does. We have to design our skinning system to make it as easy as possible for everyone to edit skins. :)

[FinalDragoon06]

The problem is a LARGE (VERY large) majority of our users are NOT power users, and barely know what a <b> tag does. We have to design our skinning system to make it as easy as possible for everyone to edit skins.[/qutoe]

You do have a point there. Have you ever looked at (or messed with) either phpBB 2/3 handles things (and/or Smarty, since they are VERY similar) If not, I recommend you take a quick look sometime...That'd probably get you better understanding than what I would ever be able to explain :lol:

My personal opinion on the subject (that is in the possible realm) is allow us to either use DB or File-based skins. File-based would allow us complainers here to user our external editors and be happy. I guess you'd also have to have a conversion between the two as well, which isn't impossible. (not fun, sure, but still possible ;) )

And I'll say this to everybody: there will never be way to upgrade templates between

major versions

without missing functionality. especially since we're talking major feature additions. I'm just saying it should be easier to complete said edits.

[ampburner]

I just upgraded my board from IPB 2.1.7 to 2.2.1 and having a reasonably customized forum skin I ran into the same obvious problems. I completely agree with the following statement....

This is a very real dilemma for customers, do we carry on paying for new licenses with our skins being destroyed on a regular basis, or do we settle for the stable version we have, and let our license lapse? When I see the work the staff on my site have put into the skins, weighing that up against having the most current version of the board is a tough call.

Having used phpbb for a couple of years, I think a really significant part of the issue is that IPB upgrades tend to include a lot of 'redesigns' of the way the software looks, feels and functions. The changes are not just little additions here and there, they are significant changes to the way the product works.

A good example would be the posting screen. Within a couple of versions (2.0 > 2.1 > 2.2) I've seen two different rich text editors (at least the way they look) ... a 'quick access' block, a bunch of AJAX things that I haven't figured out yet (what is up with the new attachment upload thingie?)... Just saying, progress is a good thing, but so is stability.

I upgraded because I needed Mysql 5 support. What I got was a big package of 'new and shiny' features (that I don't particularly need) and a broken skin.... I'm not complaining too much here, I hope, I just feel that sometimes things are changed for the sake of changing them (and selling support contracts)

As for the skinning engine....I'm still eager to hear ideas that would be possible to implement on a technical nature. :)

Here's one, albeit minimal.... I noticed that the header template has some javascript in it (mainly .js inlcudes)
When I used my old 2.1 skin (that has a custom header) with the 2.2 software, it lacked some of these includes and quite a couple of things on my forum broke.

...what you would want to do is remove these from the skinning engine entirely (actually, you want to remove as much JS from the skinning system) and have the software insert that stuff into the header regardless of

I will agree that it should only take the customer very litle work (editing one template) to get most things working again but...this feature suggestion would save a lot of customers a good scare when they see that half their functionality is broken after an update, I think.

[MikeChristopher]

I have also noticed an apparent decline is 3rd party IPB skins sites, and the number of 3rd party skins available for download. This could be seen as a direct reaction to the repeated change in IPB skinning code, and we don't really want to see a decline in any aspect of IPB development.

tbh I think this has more to do with the factor, that after IPB stopped releasing a free version of the board many resource sites and skinners (the decent ones at least) realised there was money that could be made from what was being offered at that time for free.

With paid skins and modifications comes piracy/illegal distrubution and many decided they were not in a position to deal with this or simply lost interest as they were losing a ton of cash every time somone downloaded their work from a warez site.

[FinalDragoon06]

Having used phpbb for a couple of years, I think a really significant part of the issue is that IPB upgrades tend to include a lot of 'redesigns' of the way the software looks, feels and functions. The changes are not just little additions here and there, they are significant changes to the way the product works.

A good example would be the posting screen. Within a couple of versions (2.0 > 2.1 > 2.2) I've seen two different rich text editors (at least the way they look) ... a 'quick access' block, a bunch of AJAX things that I haven't figured out yet (what is up with the new attachment upload thingie?)... Just saying, progress is a good thing, but so is stability.

We also have to keep in mind that they haven't released a major or minor release in some time...since 2k2 (major.minor.revision)

I noticed that the header template has some javascript in it (mainly .js includes)

When I used my old 2.1 skin (that has a custom header) with the 2.2 software, it lacked some of these includes and quite a couple of things on my forum broke.

...what you would want to do is remove these from the skinning engine entirely (actually, you want to remove as much JS from the skinning system) and have the software insert that stuff into the header regardless of

I will agree that it should only take the customer very little work (editing one template) to get most things working again but...this feature suggestion would save a lot of customers a good scare when they see that half their functionality is broken after an update, I think.

I'd rather have it all in one "Replacement Macro" <{JAVASCRIPT}> or something. I think there is possibility for more uses for the Macros, honestly..turning them into proper template variables would be nice...so having something like (sorry, phpBB example again!) {U_MEMBERS} instead of throwing $this->ipsclass->foo->more_foo->bar->link_to_memberlist (I'm exaggerating of course, but still). Having that actually in the template, I'm surprised that those "adhere to all web standards" type people weren't yelling because you didn't 100% separate code from presentation ;)

Now I'm also thinking we all bring up the javascript simply because that's what broke things in the 2.1->2.2 upgrade.

[VelvetElvis]

Or even abstract things to the level that it's possible to use multiple template engines at once.

Smarty would rock.

Brandon:

Keep in mind power users are often people who work in IT related fields and make large scale purchasing decisions. Were I in such a position and assigned with setting up 100 boards in six months IPB would be out of the question. The skinning more than anything else limits IPB's scalability and is why vb remains the product of choice for IT managers.

[FinalDragoon06]

Or even abstract things to the level that it's possible to use multiple template engines at once.

Smarty would rock.

Brandon:

Keep in mind power users are often people who work in IT related fields and make large scale purchasing decisions. Were I in such a position and assigned with setting up 100 boards in six months IPB would be out of the question. The skinning more than anything else limits IPB's scalability and is why vb remains the product of choice for IT managers.

Now that is a good idea, but is it feasible?