Jump to content

Condensed or expanded view not working


ibaker

Recommended Posts

I have suddenly found that in the activity streams the Condensed or Expanded view selection does not work i.e. you can't change from the default. This is on my own site AND also here on Invision plus it is not just me as my users on my own site are experiencing it.

Windows 10, Firefox 71

Is anyone else experiencing this issue or know of what could be wrong...thanks

Expanded view (Invision site default)

1.thumb.jpg.f10c2e362513b18400c29da1b76a4a9e.jpg

 

Condensed View - still the same as Expanded

2.thumb.jpg.2fe4646acb04445cfb23f8cc092d05a2.jpg

Edited by ibaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Daniel F said:

It's indeed a bug and we have a fix for this, but unfortunately due to holidays and our closure today I do not have an ETA for that at present and apologise for any inconvenience this issue has caused. 

Can you hint us with a solution if its not too complicated so we can apply the fix temporarily ourselves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sergey Pedan said:

Can you hint us with a solution if its not too complicated so we can apply the fix temporarily ourselves?

There is no easy way

1. Go to PMA

2. Run sql-query 

SELECT * FROM core_javascript WHERE javascript_name='ips.utils.cookie.js';

If the tables have a prefix add it

3. Click on javascript_content field

4. Find 

1 Jan 2020

change 2020 to 2021

5. Save changes

You can skip steps 2-5 and run sql-query 

UPDATE core_javascript SET javascript_content=REPLACE(javascript_content,'2020','2021') WHERE javascript_name='ips.utils.cookie.js';

6. Clear the cache. ACP - System - Support - Something isn't working correctly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think this comes down to more than just the issue itself. It shows that there is a date that is hard stored in the IPS product. Now this is all well and good for those that have active licenses and thus the support that comes with it (like myself) but what about those who do not have active licenses? Perhaps they have refrained from renewing their licenses till a major update or perhaps they are just happy with what they already have as a site solution? However, their solution now has an end date in the effective use of some of its functionality which was not disclosed to them at the time of install. It is stated that they are allowed to use the solution without an active license but they are not advised that part(s) of the solution will self destruct at set dates.

Did we not learn anything from Y2K?

So now we come down to the ethics and morals of IPS management and staff? If they knew they had hard stored dates in their solution and did nothing to rectify this as it will force users to renew their licenses thus financial greed then we have a company that is extremely unethical providing us with a solution. However, this can not be proven from the outside looking in so a benefit of doubt must be given but doubt all the same. Now where morals come into and whether the company is morally fit I think will come down to how they address this hard stored date in their solution with all those that are still using IPS without a current active license. If IPS was to advise a solution to this issue with all previous license holders then it would be considered that IPS is morally fit and sound, if they don't then not only would they be seen as an immoral company but more strength is given to the doubt of whether they are an ethical company.

You could in theory set up a server and install a version of IPS and leave it working as it was at the time of install in the same manner that it was intended to work at that time for years, that is what IPS provides for in its licensing agreement whether you have a current license or not, and as stipulated many times "You can continue to use IPS without a current license". Hard stored dates in a solution causing it to diminish in its capability and functionality is not acceptable and this type of 20thy century coding should not be tolerated in this 21st century unless it is  clearly stated at the time of acquisition (i.e. 60 day trial etc).

My 5c worth (that's 5c AUD inclusive of gst)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Management

I'm sorry this has occurred. As cookies require expiration dates, a developer seemingly just picked 2020 as an arbitrary date as that javascript code was written several years ago and at that point, it seemed far enough in the future; unfortunately, it was just overlooked. Unfortunately, it happens; even the giants like Apple have had to push updates to fix date issues. The issue has of course been fixed and that expiration date is now generated and inserted based on current date + 1 year, which is standard practice now. We have also ensured there were no other "hardcoded" dates (there weren't.) 

@ibaker - I can appreciate your frustration and once again, I offer my sincerest apologies. With that said, I do respectfully think it's a leap to say the software (or even a portion there-of) "self-destructs" or has an "end-date" because a cookie has expired that simply controls a UI/stream preference. We certainly didn't do: if( date('Y') == '2020') { exit; } You are absolutely correct it shouldn't have occurred - but this is unfortunately no different than any other bug. 

The issue cannot be simply patched, unfortunately, as it requires an actual upgrade process to rebuild the javascript (v4.5 should allow us to correct JS issues without a full release.) We will, however, be releasing 4.4.9.2 to specifically address this first thing tomorrow (Thursday) morning. We never recommend manually manipulating the database, but if you are unable to upgrade for whatever reason, @newbie LAC's fix is suitable. 

An unfortunate way to ring in the New Year, but we appreciate your understanding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ibaker said:

So now we come down to the ethics and morals of IPS management and staff? If they knew they had hard stored dates in their solution and did nothing to rectify this as it will force users to renew their licenses thus financial greed then we have a company that is extremely unethical providing us with a solution. However, this can not be proven from the outside looking in so a benefit of doubt must be given but doubt all the same. Now where morals come into and whether the company is morally fit I think will come down to how they address this hard stored date in their solution with all those that are still using IPS without a current active license. If IPS was to advise a solution to this issue with all previous license holders then it would be considered that IPS is morally fit and sound, if they don't then not only would they be seen as an immoral company but more strength is given to the doubt of whether they are an ethical company.

😲 OMG!! I've heard some stuff here over the years... but...

Edited by DesignzShop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Lindy, yes I would have thought the code would have been something like Date() + 365 instead of hard coded which is the normal practice since Y2K...I just feel sorry for those that have not renewed their license for whatever reason that they have decided to be appropriate for them with decision making when planning out their site and its future.

I was the director of a $260m Y2K program of work 20 years ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...