Hatsu

As per title, more info in this topic: 
 

I decided what I am going to do.
Parser will GET to https://my.url/api/cms/records/{database_id} pulling all records in the table, not locked(reserved) for another parser. Parser will figure out which record it wants to work on. Parser will GET to https://my.url/api/cms/records//{database_id}/{record_id} to see if the record is still unlocked. Parser will POST to https://my.url/api/cms/records/{database_id}/{record_id} locking the record.  This will prevent it from being offered to others.   There may be a chance another parser locks the record between step 3/4, but I can code to minimize that.  There would be no more than a few parsers running and the tasks can take many minutes.
 

Yes, as @opentype said.

The issue: when someone let’s a subscription (product subscription or regular subscription) expire, they will later not be able to buy it again, because the invoice on file prevents a new subscription. But the existing subscription also cannot be renewed because the invoice has expired. This can only be solved by intervention from an admin (manually finding and deleting these invoices), but there might be hundreds of those and it would require a constant monitoring of expired invoices. 
The solution: The check that prevents a new subscription with an invoice on file should be removed or adjusted. Someone who doesn’t have a subscription anymore, because subscription and invoice have expired, must be treated like anyone who never had a subscription. Both groups should see exactly the same offers because their status in relation to these subscriptions is the same. 
Why it matters: People run into this problem all the time and it’s not just an inconvenience, it it costing them money, because people who would want to pay cannot pay and probably just give up. Here are just a few examples from the recent days (and I have observed this and commented on it for years): 
Subscription buttons don't show up. (yesterday)
Subscriptions Bug (yesterday)
invoice has expired but member cannot renew (7 days ago)
The development time to fix this is probably much cheaper than having IPS support deal with this issue for years, constantly identifying the issue and guiding people through the process of the possible work-arounds. So it would be a win-win situation to finally fix this. 😉 

Hi,
We're seeing an SSL error when trying to connect to your community, this is due to your server not supporting TLS 1.2 (it only supports TLS 1.3). Typically, servers should support a minimum of TLS 1.2 in addition to TLS 1.3 for maximum compatibility (older consumer devices may not be able to access your community either).
Your server administrator should be able to assist with this if you're not quite sure what it means.

I'm afraid, there is no copy/duplicate option for pages inside the Pages application. If you would like, I can move this to our Feature Suggestion forum to be reviewed for a future release?

Marketplace is 100% standalone.  It's used to pay the app developers, etc and is separate from the main IPS offering.  
There is no way to transfer credits from IPS to Marketplace or vice versa.  
With that being said...  PayPal does support paying via credit card as well.  It's generally how I purchase all of my add ons as I don't keep money inside of a PayPal account.  It's essentially just a payment gateway for me.  

The renewal price has changed last year. For me it was the same. Renewal for my suite went up from $105 to $150.

Hi guys
Long time InvisionCommunity user, almost-first-time poster. 🙂 I've been using this software to power my community forums for about 15+ years now and I'm looking to take the next step by building an integrated site for my users. I recently purchased the Pages app to experiment with it - the idea is that, one day, I might migrate a long-running Wordpress blog into Pages. With that in mind, I had a few ideas that would greatly help with improving workflow and ensure more consistent connectivity between Forums and Pages. I hope you'll consider them!
To keep things concise, my ideas here are focused on the 'Copy to Database' feature of Pages (I do have other ideas but this is the biggest area of concern for me - I'll post the other suggestions in a separate thread).
 
My Setup
In AdminCP > Pages > Databases > Articles > Forums, 'Post Topic' and 'Use Forum For Comments' are enabled. Post Topic is enabled because not every article we write will be sourced from a forum topic or Copied to Database, and we want to make sure that all news stories we write have an associated topic posted (i.e. if a topic does not exist already, we want to create a topic, but if a topic does exist we want to Copy to Database and use that particular topic as the news story's associated topic) Use Forum for Comments is enabled because we want to always marry the comments in news stories with the replies in the associated topic. We never want this feature to be disabled.  
My Scenario
A regular user in my community discovers some interesting news that they may have read elsewhere, and posts a topic on a particular forum. A member of my community's "News Team" usergroup sees this topic, notices that our Articles database has yet to cover this news topic. The News Team member chooses to 'Copy to Database' the original topic. The original topic is written in a way that works fine for a community environment, but it needs editing in order to read well as a news article. So the News Team member modifies the original topic content to suit the tone of voice we want to present within our news stories.  
The Issues
When the News Team member posts the news story, a duplicate topic is made (in the forum selected in AdminCP). This has the result of confusing the community as there are now two separate topics in which to submit replies/comments to.
  When rebuilding synchronised topic content, the original topic's content is modified to match that of the news story which was created from it. This is not desired behaviour; if copied to database, the expectation is that the original topic remains the same, with any edits made for the news story living solely on the page record/database.
  There's no topic meta to illustrate to users on the forum that a news story was created from it.  
The Solutions:
1. 'Post Topic' Override (per Record basis)

A simple checkbox could be added to a record creation page, if the 'Post Topic' setting is enabled for that database in AdminCP. What this will do is ensure that a topic is not created when the record is created. This will be useful for users who want to use an existing topic as the basis for a record's comments/replies without splintering it into a duplicate topic elsewhere. However, some users might find posting a duplicate topic useful (for instance, they might want to dedicate a specific forum for record entries), which is why having this as an ad-hoc option is the best solution here.
 
2. AdminCP-level Option to Keep Topic/Record Content Separate

Provide a toggle which allows the content in the Original Topic to remain unaffected/does not sync with the copy written in the Page content. I would have thought that this would be standard behaviour, so it's surprising that it's not. I doubt many community members would appreciate their topics being edited without their consent, so this option would fix that issue. This could be a new setting added to AdminCP, which applies to all records made in a database (as illustrated above).
 
3. Add Topic Meta to Copied Topics
Upon using 'Copy to Database', have a setting/toggle (default setting: On) that automatically inserts a new Topic Meta box in the original/source topic, detailing that a user has used the thread as a basis for a new 'record/story/article'. Clicking the Meta box could dynamically expand it, revealing an excerpt of the new story/record/article (Title, Author, Date, Excerpt, Link to Full Article). Some ideas as to how that would look like below.
Idea 1:

Idea 2:

This could also be a setting in the Database options page in AdminCP. A feature like this would be a more elegant solution when copying topics to databases, instead of simply syncing the topic content and record content to be identical. It can also allow users who create interesting topics to see that their posts have been considered worthy of interest from the moderation/news team. You could even tie Achievements/Points/Rewards to this - users who create topics that a moderating team deems interesting for a story, could be awarded points for 'sourcing' the content.
---------------------------------------------------
Hopefully these suggestions are worth considering and implementing in a future update. I know the next update of the Core app is at the forefront of the development team's minds right now, but I think these would be great QOL updates for the Pages app that can make it even more unified with the Forums/Core. Thanks for reading!

Please add possibility to manually reorder uploaded files within downloads entry. This is useful when providing next versions of files within same revision and wanting to have them in specific order. You may say to upload them in desired order but when wanting to re-upload specific file within record and keep order of files there is a need to remove files uploaded after the file we want to replace and then upload them back after replaced file.

You introduce dragging everywhere it is useful, hope you will consider it there too.

Hi guys, starting to get used to Pages app as a potential alternative to move away from my current Wordpress setup (although there are a few issues that I'd like to see resolved first before I take the plunge, I've made topics about those before here I think), and looking for a solution to easily allow for a "Writers" usergroup to share a common imagebank when developing articles and news stories etc.
After playing around with the Invision Community Demo, I've found that the Gallery app could be a potentially elegant solution for this, by creating a gallery that is only visible to "Admins" and "Writers" (not Members or Guests). I thought a great feature was the ability to search through Gallery Images when looking to add media to a Pages record, as shown below:

However, only the user that uploaded the image can opt to use it in this way - not the rest of the usergroup (or any other group that has access to the gallery). When a different user (who did not originally upload the image) in the "Writer" group tries to add an image the same way, they only see this:

It would be great if we could allow for shared galleries, that multiple people in a usergroup can all access no matter who originally uploaded the images.

*Warning RANT*
Tonight I decided to update all my database templates for this application mainly due to upgrading to PHP 8 and all the changes done to the templates over the last few updates.
Every time I go to do work on this, my heart always sinks because I detest working on the templates via the admin area. The first thing to happen tonight, I reverted one of the templates and it was gone, deleted, *poof* without a warning or anything.
This is usually the point where I say to myself; (Insert some swear words) it would be easier for me to write an application which would allow me to convert all my databases over to WordPress (I have done this before). However, I detest WordPress more mainly due to its lack of actual template system (The irony is not lost on me here) and not being able to tie users across both CMS's without jumping through hoops and costing a fortune.
I honestly have a total love hate relationship with this application. I love the power of it, but I hate the MANY bugs, flaws and the implementation of the templates area within the Pages ACP.
I have 100's of different templates for many different databases, and it is a PITA to navigate all because someone thought it was a neat idea to order them in order by the date the templates were last modified 😕 !!
Template Ordering
This is the default ordering of Database templates is to display templates by last edited. While this might be okay for a few templates, it's a bloody nightmare when you have 100's of different templates.
This is the default ordering for just the Database templates:

This the order after I wrote a plug-in to order database templates in a more readable form.

This is what I would have to content with when dealing with the default order in a working environment. There is no structure this at all and it's just a complete an utter eye sore and total mess. If you are wondering why there are spaces in my template names, it's because I changed the code to allow this.

This is the database templates ordered in a more readable order by name.

Parent Category for Database Templates.
Adding new Database templates is a nightmare as well. Instead of just being able to copy the default or a user database templates all in one go, I have to do this separately for Category List, Feature Lists, Recording listings etc etc. It is so time consuming having to do this over and over.
I would prefer to create Database Template Category and select all the different Template types for that Category using a multi-select option for this.
For example:

This way, if I need to copy database templates, then I just need to copy the parent and the children in one go.
Any one who has worked with the template system, knows how badly thought out this whole part is. Trying to copy, move, save,  rename, export and import templates is a total nightmare.
Template Naming
Also, the naming of templates goes against what you already have as the defaults database templates. You do not allow spaces in template names, yet your own templates uses them. Spaces are used for readability purposes, if you can use spaces in Theme Templates why change naming convention here?

Updates and QOL life changes.
This application has had no real love at all. It's basically the same as it was when version 4 was released. The only changes have been bug fixes and changes forced due to the core changes. I have seen many topics with feature requests to this Application and they go ignored time and time again.
The engine behind this application is really powerful, yet the front end templates are a complete and utter joke and have no value in the real word. If I wanted a forum clone, I would have used my forums instead. Out of the box, this application is disappointing. If it were not for people like @opentype doing a lot of good work with his templates etc, people would have dumped this application a long time ago as it is not what people expect from an Article Management system.
Will you give this Application some love and attention please!
My apologies for the rant...... I would rather have my nails pulled out one at a time than work on this application.

This would lead to a syntax error in PHP as an operator itself can't be a function. Or am I wrong?
Actually, the editor would have to be modified that text between {{ }} should not be parsed for syntax highlighting.

Do your tasks run? There is a task viewupdates which runs every five minutes. I guess that he is responsible for the updates.

When working with theme templates, there is a Revert button. When we click it, we get a warning and we can safely restore the stock template. 
When working with Pages templates (Pages → Templates) a Revert button exists in the same spot, yet, behaves completely different. It actually DELETES the template, even without warning, potentially making the entire template set unusable with no way to add the missing template back to the template set. 

To replicate:
create a Pages database template (e.g. Record template) edit a template (e.g. Record → Record) it actually shows a delete button now and the template is marked with an orange “C” instead of a green “I” (what do those stand for by the way?) now leave the template section and come back now the same template will be shown with a red M and the “revert” button appears, calling an “?do=delete“ action.  To sum up the bug report: 
The Revert button should get the correct label “Delete” and and a warning dialog explaining that deleting a template could permanently damage a template set. Feature request: 
Having an actual Revert button for a template in a template set would be welcome. I can create an entire template set at any time. Why can’t I revert a modified template back to the unmodified state, just as with theme templates?

Arne,
I agree, you don't need to be a conspiracy enthusiast or tin foil hat wearing website owner to see it's grossly invasive of privacy and quite unjustifiable in the days of GDPR. We can't restrict it to commerce or checkout related pages only and Stripe bless 'em, surely can't detect card fraud by 100's if not 1000's of updates about individuals reading topics about say favourite pizza toppings, looking after tropical fish etc.
When you factor in more or highly sensitive content, perhaps medical conditions or preferences, thats really not good, off the scale not good!
Site visitors can't opt out of it, certainly before it starts tracking them, as far as I can see, which isn't right.
There have been numerous topics here about it in the past. Its only a recommendation but certainly not a requirement, so I wish IPS (as established corporate advocates of anonymous posting and pride etc) would step up and take some ownership on improving this, and provide us with AdminCP options either for sidewide, commerce or checkout Stripe integration only.

The provided feed doesn't contain the full article. So you can't show the full article in your post, either.

Or you set this and login to then disable things...
<?php define('RECOVERY_MODE',True);

Having a separate test/dev site separate from your "production" environment is pretty much standard practice. Yet for cloud accounts that has presented a problem ... unless we've missed something that is available.
Since transitioning to Invision cloud , in addition to our main site, we have paid for the smallest legacy cloud account as a test/dev site.  Its closed to guests , and can only be accessed by accounts that are created by our Admin.  We prototyped our site there prior to our actual migration from our previous vendor and have maintained it since. 
This second site was/is invaluable in preventing  issues  ... particularly in one of the major upgrades  (4.5 ??)  which changed how the default theme handled the header space and made some 3rd party themes as well as some apps unusable.  We were able to find out what issues specifically affected our site.  And it was huge.  If we had just applied it to production, it would have been a disaster.
Same with the initial roll-out implementation of lazy loading .  We had images imbedded in the Forum descriptions which caused issues which we caught on our test/dev site.  Invision support recognized the problem as somewhat unique to us at that time.
I could go on, but the value that a test/site provides is obvious.  Even for small, non commercial sites like ours.
However now that option is going to cost more since Invision is closing out the legacy options with new, more expensive offerings.  The increase in cost and "functionality" does not, for us, create any new value.  Particularly since our use case for the account has an infinitesimal impact on the Invision host environment. 
There should be a fixed, low cost method of providing an option for managers/developers of cloud accounts where than can duplicate their unique production environment for the purposes of testing new apps/upgrades etc.

When it's ready:)
or
Soon™ ( Sorry for not being more specific )

Unfortunatly it was delayed because we've prioritised the task to make it available for self hosted clients, before we ship any new Zapier features.
That said, we've enhanced some existing REST API endpoints and have added few new webhooks for the next release of the suite, which are required for our new Zapier triggers and actions, which are coming along other many under the hood improvements.
I really can't wait to share all the new stuff with you!
 

This one has always been a major complaint on my site...  This also seems like it should be basic functionality of the downloads system.

Why can you not set a download category as a section that can't be uploaded to and act just as a category header?  I've tried multiple addons that are supposed to help, but they don't really work as expected.  Currently setting permissions to not allow uploads to the parent category effect the child categories.  Why not have a a toggle for that section to act as a header only (display all files for child cats under it like it currently does), just don't allow files to be uploaded to that section.

Hi,
I would like to see a choice between an image or FA code in the Icon field:

 
Currently the image is required and shared between more than one theme. The same icon can look bad on Light and Dark theme.
So now I need to upload some "dummy" image to satisfy the dialog and then override it anyway via custom.css:
.cke_button__custom-ButtonID_icon { background-image: none !important; } .cke_button__custom-ButtonID_icon::before { content: '\f019'; }  

The signature:

Edit the record template and find:
<section class="ipsType_richText ipsContained ipsType_normal" data-controller='core.front.core.lightboxedImages'>{$record->_content|raw}</section> Add below:
{{if trim( $record->author()->signature )}} <br> {template="signature" location="front" group="global" app="core" params="$record->author()"} {{endif}} Will result in:

I'm working on the nightowl ticket right now.
 
Edit: It's an issue with the "neviewpasswordonstandardlogin" plugin

Ah, I see. Thank you for clarification.