LiquidFractal

Good idea, Next update ^^
But not soon i have to say, due to some other works. 
 
Thank you.

Please choose different settings for position in configuration tab, thats what they are for, so in case one doesn't work with a theme another one should.
try the "In the main body layout" this should work with any theme out there
 
I will improve the position targeting in next update also to support ipsfocus themes, for now try the setting i mentioned above  

hi!
Ones you install advanced footer it is added to all of your themes, however there are no options to show the footer on a specific theme, but you can simply use custom.css to hide the footer on any themes you want 
simple, you add this to custom.css of the theme you want to hide  
.af_Container {display: none;}  

Than you very much @Martin A.

Yes, I will update it, and hopefully get it ready before the stable release of 4.2.

Do I dare to ask when MM will run on 4.2? (Yeah, when it's ready.. )

This is an important feature for my site as well, as I regularly need to look through someone's posting history without having to enter a specific tag or keyword.  

Related topic here blanketsearch for Member content without tags/terms?

4.2 compatibility fixes will be posted very soon. I'm just adding a few new features and other upgrades to GC while I'm at it to fill some gaps.

An update came out a few hours ago with initial 4.2 compatibility fyi.

Well @Kevin Carwile, I finally decided to purchase the full Collabs version.  Even though I might use Groups for something different on my site, there's no getting around the quality of your work (even if I will be pestering you with questions in the coming weeks ).  I've tried your Rules app, and I know your work is rock solid, so I'm happy to support you.

If anything Collabs is much more powerful than Clubs ...
In clubs you can only create one forum node at a time. (No subforums)
In clubs the permission set is completely neutered because it's preset to one of four styles of clubs.  This is something that I think is a fatal weakness to clubs.  
In clubs you can't have pages or databases.
In clubs you can't have categories of clubs. 
In clubs you can't have custom member titles.  
On and on.  
While I'm generally supportive of IPS and their vision for clubs as first party product, it's a very shallow and immature implementation.  That's not to say it's bad, and if you listen to other IPS clients, you can get fooled into thinking Clubs is the most amazing and awesome thing ever.  But it's really not.  It's a rather weak product compared to the full strength of Collabs which allows you to use the full app in a collaboration. 

The can create their own pages in the sense that you can allow groups to use databases you have set up in the ACP. So they can create their own categories and records in those categories for that database.
But configuring their own blocks and adding them to their collab is not currently possible due to technical limitations in the ability to control blocks visibility "per page" in core ips.
Maybe when core improvements are made there...

Now thats what im talking bout and wanted to see @Kevin Carwile
That right there will give the push for EVERYONE to keep your app up and running...May i add that you are a Beast when it comes to making apps!!
But back to your response...you give enough detail to answer questions and more, i appreciate it and will be looking forward to new updates! keep up the good work!!  

It is. The dropdown menu for nodes when managing them from the ACP has an option to move it to a collab.
Where do I start. 
GC provides intelligent and granular partitioning of existing site resources instead of trying to recreate them in some other form. Because of this approach, it allows groups to use all apps at their full strength, in their full form, including all configuration features of that app that get added or changed as it evolves.... inherently.
Clubs on the other hand provides an alternate way for apps to offer up their configuration in "club mode".
For example, create a forum in a "club" and you'll be able to set its name and description. 
Create a forum in GC and you set its name, description, icon, password, theme, link, post count pre-requisites, order, nesting level, permissions, and everything in between.
Similarly, it supports all apps that follow the container/content model out of the box because it doesnt attempt to know how to intercede with its configuration. 
They really are two totally different approaches that result in two different products.
Other key differences that I can see is that GC also partions the permissions system in its full capacity also. Meaning groups are able to define their own custom roles inside the group with all the same moderator permission granularity of the main site assigned to those roles inside the group, and permissions matrices for the group content set up based on those roles as well.
Then theres the whole rules ECA integration. Group memberships and actions can be tied into automation quite easily if needed.
Clubs will be a great way for sites to roll out some basic group participation facilities. And GC will remain the solution for when you want to empower your groups to collaborate using the full power of the IPS4 community suite.

@Kevin Carwile a question about implementing Pages in Collab categories: is it at all possible to allow category owners (who are not an admin) to create their own pages and create/add blocks?  If this isn't possible, is it a foreseeable addition in the future?  Thanks!

If that's all it is, then I'll make sure it doesn't throw anything off on the default theme and just add it to the app so you don't have to change it on every upgrade.

ok, thats what i was asking kev to explain, if it is better then i see to keep it, and thats why i ask these questions, spending money like that, i need to know and ask alot of questions
so thanks and i will also wait for kevs response so he can tell more on whats better in Collabs

This isn't quite true.  To name one important difference: The Clubs function in 4.2 does not allow association of Pages or Databases with created Clubs - Collabs allow you to use all the IPS suite's functions.  There's also no way of knowing when (or even if) that ability will be implemented in Clubs.  MOreover, I believe I read it's also integrated with @Kevin Carwile's Rules application.  Does that sound right Kevin?
That's what I know anyway...I'll leave it to others more familiar with the software to describe more differences.

​All configurations are supported and the product is built using standard core management interfaces. It extends all of the same management options, permissions systems, and application features that you will already be familiar with from the IPS4 suite and puts them into group context and makes them available from the front end. It's as if you are allowing your groups to manage their own IPS4 suite's inside of your own IPS4 suite. Aside from GC's addition of membership management features for the group, everything else is stock IPB. This way any other content types, apps, and plugin features you add to your site will also be available inside of groups the same way they are outside.
For example, the forum configuration form a group leader uses to create forums inside his group is the same form you use in the ACP. And post counts inside of a group are tracked independently from main site posts, so when a group leader chooses to have a minimum post count to create topics in his forum, that limit applies in context to just his group. Or if he changes a member's title, it applies only in context to his group. So when that member posts inside the group, his member title may be different than if he posts outside the group. But the behavior of the app (such as forums) is exactly the same either way.
I imagine that I will have written a book on it all by the time the product has fully matured. But for now, you'll have to take it in foreword and cliff notes.

Very nice.  Moving an existing forum to this application would be awesome.  I know some of my forum separated communities wouldn't want to move to something like this unless they had their existing conversations moved over.  Create that ability and you've got my $75. 

​GC does a lot to track, brand, and organize group content, but still allows the apps that host the content drive the pages fully. This means that FURLs, templates, and other system mods all are going to work with GC just as they would without. So if anything special needs to be done to forums or their furls in order to work nicely with tapatalk, then a mod that addresses that need can be installed and will work the same inside of GC as it does outside.
​It's going to be from the date of purchase.
​I have been approached a couple times already regarding building some migration utilities for people coming from other apps. I think that is a great idea and I'd like to see everybody using the new IPS4 Suite coupled with Group Collaboration! I'll be considering the best way to go about tackling that after GC has been in the wild long enough to be sure it's stable.

Hello Adriano, do you have time and desire to implement this?
... "more than a correct answer per question" .....
thx
 

EXPLANATION field only appears in the STUDY mode quizzes. The first image is from a GRADED mode, the second from a STUDY mode.
You're copying a QUIZ or a CATEGORY?

Fixes on v1.0.0:
[ACP > Quizzes > Category > Submissions] Minor grammatical fix: "NOTE: This setting will be overriden if the permission Bypass content moderation? is enabled ..." [ACP > Quizzes > Settings] Type of Content field = Editor WYSIWYG.  But quiz still uses Textarea.   No thumbnail on quiz listing, even though picture is uploaded.  See screenshot.  

 
Small suggestions on v1.0.0:
Increase maximum questions per quiz.   Minimum answers per question: allow 2.   Allow owner to test, but not count in score When create question, show as many empty 'answer fields' as allowed by default.   Example: If "Maximum answers per question" = 5, then show 4 spaces wrong answers which I can fill out.  Ignore empty wrong answers when create question.  (Why?  Because it saves me from needing to click "+Add another")    Check if 'correct' answer is duplicated with 'incorrect' answers.   Big suggestions:
Allow create quizzes on back-end Allow create quizzes using XML import / export Integrate with iAwards by @-RAW- When I looked for example quizzes online, one common feedback is Easy / Medium / Hard.  This might be an example of a 'customized feedback rating'.
I don't really like the IPS steps.  And that should not stop us from creating quizzes with many questions.  
Please think about making your own simple counter (eg. "You are on 2 out of 40 questions.")
This would be amazing.  One bank of questions can create infinite quizzes.