Jump to content

AlexWright

Clients
  • Posts

    1,372
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Downloads

Release Notes

IPS4 Guides

IPS4 Developer Documentation

Invision Community Blog

Development Blog

Deprecation Tracker

Providers Directory

Forums

Events

Store

Gallery

Posts posted by AlexWright

  1. 1 minute ago, opentype said:

    There is no switch. It’s automatic. 

    How that image will be used depends on the template that is chosen for the various record views. 

    Ah, I could've sworn there was a switch. Thanks for the correction.

  2. 5 hours ago, opentype said:

    You need to activate and use the dedicated “Record Image” to have a featured image representing the database record. 

    That's the thing, it is activated:

    Could contain: Nature, Outdoors, Sea, Water

    But on the record, no switch exists to have the image featured:

    Could contain: File, Webpage, Text

     

    Edit: Even on default theme:

    Could contain: File, Text, Page

  3. Ok, I may be going stir crazy, but I seem to remember there being a setting to feature the uploaded image in a pages database record. Is that a setting somewhere? I'm not seeing the ability to do so on the record itself, and I've been through the database settings. If I remember right, it would show the larger image above the record text. Any help would be great, thanks!

  4. Hi all,

    Seeing a problem here upgrading from 4.6.12 to 4.7.0. This is a direct upload of files from the client area to the server, and we're now getting:

    Could contain: Text

    The error shown here. It is definitely from the 4.7.0 files, and the permissions are set to 0777 via Filezilla. Not entirely sure what's going on here, however because of the update, the site is currently down. Any help appreciated.

  5. 5 hours ago, christopher-w said:

    Can you explain a little more about what you mean here? I've been reading your comment and viewing the gallery at the same time (4.5) and wasn't sure what you are referring to.

    Sure. In categories where Allow Albums, but not Require Albums is set, users can upload to either an Album or not. Images that aren't added to an album display below a listing of all albums in the category. At one point, we has a category with over 400 albums and about ten thousand images outside of albums. Navigation became...awkward.

     

    5 hours ago, christopher-w said:

    I was thinking that Invision had done a very good job with uploads - not sure how much simpler it could be, and if you get your wish with images having the ability to reside in multiple albums, then that will add another layer of complexity (album selections) on upload. 

    This is a suggestion we made to xenforo as well, but in essence:

    1605648460981.thumb.png.796acff8873c20fd7b857431055d31db.png

    With multiple categories, one could add a Category field above the Album field in the image above. Basically have a nice tidy form for each image being uploaded which you can select these options in.

  6. Right, so this may be a long topic, and one I harp on from time to time. Now that I have moved a forum away from Invision (and over to XenForo), I'll list some of the reasons of why we made that choice, and what IPS could do better, at least from my user's experience. I'll try to break this into segments so it's not too rambling.

    1. Displaying Albums above the regular gallery navigation.

    Doing so degrades the user experience with the software. Albums should be a way for users to categorize their uploads, but should not detract from navigational experience. Instead of displaying Albums entirely separate from the general view in categories that allow both albums and regular uploads, this should display the image grid, with items from Albums included. The album in which the image appears should be listed in the image details, allowing users to browse that specific album if they wish. In doing this, you clean up the (oft times) confusing layout of categories that allow Albums and separate image uploads.

    2. Albums/image categorization in general.

    A feature of a few gallery sites is to allow an image to be categorized in more than one album. For instance, if I have an image that includes multiple characters (Say, from a game, anime, movie, or other), outside of tags it is hard to have the ability to categorize that image appropriately. Several of our users had requested a way to include an image within multiple albums without having to create duplicate copies. Even if an image could be "imported" to display in another album, this would help.

    3. Uploading needs to be simpler.

    Yes, uploading takes a lot. Select category. Select album, no album, new album (and detail new album), upload, edit each individual file anyways for description and tags. This could potentially be streamlined by:

    Upload each image.

    Select Category and Album, No Album, New Album per image.

    Set details while doing this (description, tags, etc).

    Additionally, don't allow the uploader to be closed if the user accidentally hits escape or clicks outside of the box (sometimes a warning prompt appears before the box closes, this should be always).

     

    I probably have more...but these were the big ones from the users.

  7. The ignore function is an extremely essential part of running community services such as Invision. However, I feel as if one of the most overlooked features is a fully functional Ignore and/or Block system. While we do have the current iteration of the Ignore function, it is severely lacking in some departments. The image below is (while themed) on a clean install:

    Screenshot_20210311-130057_Chrome.thumb.jpg.2e586a2c9d8b1f9639069971b864a03b.jpg

    This install has all of the Invision applications enabled (Forums, Blogs, Pages, Commerce, Downloads, Gallery). The above only references Posts (which many assume, and correctly, this refers to the Forums), Messages, and Mentions.

    So how can this be improved? There's a number of ways, and a few other items I'd like to add.

    1. Add most community applications to the Ignore list. This would mean adding Downloads, Blogs, and Gallery items (very unlikely that the need to Ignore admin generated Commerce content would arise) to this list. If I want to Ignore someone's content, generally I want to ignore all of it, not just some.

    2. Extend the functionality of Ignore into a full on Block (perhaps as a user option). Most major community/social media platforms do this. Think Twitter, Facebook, etc., where when you Block a user, they cannot access your content (including your profile) either.

    3. Add admin options to force users to ignore each other. Currently this requires logging in as the user and adding to their ignore list. At least make this accessible in the admin panel, and have options to disallow the user(s) to un-ignore/unblock each other.

    Numbers 2 and 3 here are major reasons why I moved one community off of Invision and onto a competitor and repurposed the license for another project that doesn't need this functionality yet (yet being the key term, of course). The question of "why these changes, specifically" arose in a conversation with my mod team for the community we moved away. Our main answer was: this lowers the amount of moderation work, and allows us to not need to use posting moderation and/or account suspension between users tossing barbs back and forth. We weren't a large community by any means (about 18,000 registered users), but even so these features were so asked for by the moderation team and users that it caused us to shift platforms. Hopefully something will be done with this feature set in the future.

    Cheers,

    Alex

  8. 5 hours ago, VR6Pete said:

    ahhh I see - Yes I had same issue as you with PHP memory being exhausted when running the job manually (moving localhost > S3) and I was able to set PHP limit to 512MB and completed pretty quickly after that. 

    Yeah. Turned out not to matter anyways. Not enough space on the server. Invision's ACP showed 212 GB of space used for gallery...really it's more like 800 GB with the double copies of every item (small and large version plus original). I'm still wondering why the Invision widget showed total of 212 GB of gallery disk space, unless that's just originals? Seems kind of pointless to list just that if in fact the size is much larger.

  9. 20 minutes ago, Nathan Explosion said:

    Set up a CRON job, as per settings in the ACP

    The problem is the cron job just isn't fast enough. We're already using CRON to run tasks, which includes the Queue task, which handles the background processes. I'm wondering if there's a way to speed this up without using the web interface's Run Manually.

  10. 9 minutes ago, nikos32 said:

    Why don't you ask him to quit from the Discord server and to rejoin ?

    _____________________________________________________

    @SoftwareFactoryAll the features are fully functional in my forums, but, the bot appears offline in the Discord.
    Is this normal ?

    He's not on the discord. Not in the server.

  11. 1 hour ago, bfarber said:

    This would be images submitted directly to the category, rather than a subcategory or album.

    Would it be helpful to show the "this is new" dot next to the image captions, or do you have another idea in mind to better denote what is new?

    With the quantity of images that we are seeing (we are an art site primarily), those types of notifications would likely get lost. Possibly a redirect to the user's "see more activity > gallery" page would be better on this. That way the notification is relevant, and new content would be easier to find.

×
×
  • Create New...