Jump to content

Community

djpretzel

+Clients
  • Content Count

    303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Downloads

IPS4 Documentation

IPS4 Providers

Release Notes

IPS4 Guides

IPS4 Developer Documentation

Invision Community Blog

Forums

Store

Everything posted by djpretzel

  1. For the record, we'd like this added as well, it's something we used with ATP.
  2. @Makoto Got it; confirmed it worked as well. Thanks!
  3. @Makoto All I'm seeing on the "Advanced Tools" page is an option to "lowercase all tags" - I run it, and it says it completed, but the message remains the only option on the "Advanced tools" page and doesn't go away. I'm looking for the option to migrate from the Advanced Tags & Prefixes plugin...
  4. @Kevin Carwile Can you confirm this app is abandoned & will not be supported in the future?
  5. See I'm having the exact same issue - when trying to do a lookup on "Add Tag" for a forum configured w/ closed tags, it just spins forever. I'm testing in Firefox/Win10 and using the default theme; error logged is: @Kevin Carwile any ideas?
  6. @bfarber Precisely; the case I'm making is that you don't really *want* ANY of your customers using Disqus/FB for this when they COULD be using IPS suite instead. From a "lock-in" perspective, it gets valuable data into IPS instead of having it sit with a third-party, further consolidating the investment in IPS for customers with pages on their site that sit outside the IPS framework. I'm proposing that this be a standard feature, leveraging the REST API.... customization to fit a site's visual look & feel could (and should) remain an enterprise offering, but the core of it would be a
  7. @bfarber Thanks for the explanation; it makes sense, even if it's the result of lack of foresight on the design of the RSS spec itself. Atom feeds seem to handle this much better, with multiple author elements and name specified independently. Rather than hack/deviate from RSS, perhaps also supporting Atom would be possible? In a list of forum threads, who wrote the thread is often an important differentiator, and it'd be great to see this supported OOTB by IPS.
  8. Forum RSS feeds do not include author. This information is useful. I'd personally recommend it simply be included by default, but an option to include it would also work.
  9. Necro-bumping this - the RSS feed should absolutely include the author, no reason not to, by default.
  10. Feature is described at https://invisioncommunity.com/services/remote-commenting This functionality is free & easy to implement... with Disqus AND Facebook comments plugins! ...but costs extra $$$ for IPS customers to implement using the IPS platform... 😕 Given that the primary competition for this product is both free AND discourages use of IPS, I think this "enterprise" feature should be democratized and made free/standard as well Would become a selling point for anyone with a site that exists outside of IPS (i.e. not implemented in Pages) that uses IPS as their c
  11. I'll be posting this in feedback as well, as @bfarber recommends, but I think the following should strongly be considered: Make the REST API mandatory (at least for access from same host) Start using the REST API within the default IPS theme for things like the widgets, user status In other words, even for the core product, start moving to more of an SPA paradigm, with graceful fallback to server-side content when possible In this fashion, the REST API becomes more immediately useful to all developers, because it's guaranteed to be present and is hooked in to the way the
  12. @bfarber Historically one of the IPS "enterprise" offerings has been a comments widget that can be placed on any page, ala Disqus - at least that's my understanding of how it works? What I'd really like to see is that particular functionality democratized & offered as a frontend component that works hand-in-hand with your REST API. Our site has thousands of pages that are stored in a separate database, outside of IPS - for good reasons. I'd LOVE to offer integrated comment threads on these pages, to tie the entire community together. So whatever combination of REST API endpoints *AND*
  13. If you supported a Bootstrap 4 theme OOTB (either as replacement default, or a streamlined & officially-supported secondary option), would people complain if/when it doesn't support Bootstrap 5? Probably, but... who cares? In other words, some people will always complain about certain things, right? What it WOULD allow access to is: A gigantic body of themes, free & commercial... Easier integration of third-party widgets/components which themselves offer default theming in bootstrap (often multiple versions) An exhaustive number of developers intimate with t
  14. 4.1.19.1 is out - can anyone confirm that it includes the patches previously posted, and works with this addon?
  15. No problem with the 4.X version of the add-on being charged for separately. Problem with things continuing to break on 4.X updates... I get that the finger can be pointed in both directions, IPS devs & add-on devs, but finger pointing isn't helping all that much... right now there's a 4.1.19 update marked as security-related that breaks this add-on, leaving two options: Update, be secure, and break the add-on. Wait, be less secure, and hope the add-on is fixed or that IPS patches to 4.1.19.1 Both options are poo. Whatever can be done to prevent poo options
  16. Shouldn't the actual install queries be modified as per IPS's request? Will the plugin be updated to match, or will we always have to run this queries.json file? @Ryan H.?
  17. I don't know about the rest, but I do agree that turnkey Wordpress integration would be a pretty compelling selling point for anyone not satisfied with bbpress and wanting something more robust while keeping their main content on WP... that's gotta be a meaningful cross-section of sites, I'd think... It's a new era, y'all... Microsoft open-sourced .NET, released it for Linux, and even ported SQL Server to Linux... the days of pretending the (overwhelmingly popular) competition don't exist and not playing nice are over. If there were a roadmap (dirty word, I know) for IPS 4.X, I would just
  18. @Ryan Ashbrook Would you mind elaborating? I'm a little frustrated that this level of comment integration is a "custom" service that IPS only provides to larger clients, when it *seems* like it could be an addon/product that you could make available to everyone, for a reasonable price... is there any reason that this solution/integration needs to be client-specific and (presumably, since no numbers are provided!) more expensive than a traditional IPS offering?
  19. Yeah it's an unfortunate situation right now, because critical security patches are being bundled into feature releases that have their own sets of bugs PLUS cause compatibility issues with third-party stuff... meaning that if you want to be secure, you have to break things. Right now there's no way to run a secure version of IPS4 that also handles linking mentions correctly... I can chalk most of this up to "IPS4 is still stabilizing" but that *would* be easier to remember & swallow if the roadmap was brought back from the dead (again!) and we had an idea of when we might see a
  20. Beyond simply liking this post, I have to quote it & emphasize that this is exactly what I'm thinking as well... also a big fan, also want to see IPS succeed, also believe that the testing process should be automated beyond whatever level it currently is so as to address more of the types of bugs we're seeing with each release...
  21. It *feels* that way to us, but I trust @Lindy that they are testing as best they can... what I'm wondering is whether there are process improvements on their end that maybe they're not aware of, suggestions, ideas, etc. from people perhaps more intimately familiar with web application QA, etc. that could benefit them. I sometimes think IPS underestimates the technical prowess of its community and doesn't treat it as the resource it is & could be...
  22. @Lindy Thanks for the detailed response as always; much appreciated. From a technical perspective, with regard to automated/unit testing, I'm wondering if you have anything that could catch something like this bug: ...? If not, I do think there are solutions out there... in this specific case, anything doing automatic/scripted content generation that included mentions would potentially be able to catch the resulting 404 error on the flip side, among other approaches... I know from experience that *writing* such tests can take a ton of time, but that investment usually pays off
  23. Yeah people often assume things when you aren't specific... you just said the thread was being presented "in a hysterical manner" and didn't provide any specifics. Which part was "hysterical," exactly? Tell us next time, and no one will *have* to assume anything... win-win for everyone.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use technologies, such as cookies, to customise content and advertising, to provide social media features and to analyse traffic to the site. We also share information about your use of our site with our trusted social media, advertising and analytics partners. See more about cookies and our Privacy Policy