bfarber

You guys remember there's a reputation feature in IPB3 that allows you to do a +1 built in right...?

You guys remember there's a reputation feature in IPB3 that allows you to do a +1 built in right...?

It will at least be another hour. Think that covers all the bases?



Edit: This is an attempt at humor, and not an actual release timeframe/idea. ;)

It should be both a matter of days and weeks. I mean, if it was 8 weeks, that's 56 days. So either way you'd be right. :)

There are no plans to charge for subscription manager separately at this time. We are intending to release it as a community project once we've got it updated and running with IPB3 properly.

It will at least be another hour. Think that covers all the bases?



Edit: This is an attempt at humor, and not an actual release timeframe/idea. ;)

It will at least be another hour. Think that covers all the bases?



Edit: This is an attempt at humor, and not an actual release timeframe/idea. ;)

It should be both a matter of days and weeks. I mean, if it was 8 weeks, that's 56 days. So either way you'd be right. :)

Ok ok. There is no way in IPB to turn off IP address tracking, nor will there ever likely be an option to do so. Hopefully that addresses your original post.

As this topic has kind of taken a life of it's own, I'm going to close it now.

Ok ok. There is no way in IPB to turn off IP address tracking, nor will there ever likely be an option to do so. Hopefully that addresses your original post.

As this topic has kind of taken a life of it's own, I'm going to close it now.

Generally when Charles notifies me he has found a bug, I go hunt it down (because he's usually reported it by that time) and mark it working as intended or not a bug.


Then I go back and try to fix it later.

@Wolfie, I'd rather see it as a user-based setting than an ACP setting, but I don't see a problem with adding a setting itself.

As for showing the post, that was a design decision. Talk to Rikki. :whistle:

If you feel the site is slow, all I can say is I'm sorry.

As Lee mentioned, we're routinely doing debugging on this site for various reasons (especially given that we are running pre-final software) and this factors into a lot of things. We found an issue yesterday where a couple of requests to a specific topic triggered some infinite loops which slowed things down. We fixed those things yesterday and restarted Apache, but, the point is we're running pre-final software and we are still finding the odd-off issue now and then. Matt truncated the topic markers table today (no doubt was a little slow), which means a lot of processing for all users at first to rebuild marker records. There are constantly things going on that will affect speed, so if you are noticing fluctuations (like you've mentioned) then attribute it to the fact that we're probably doing something, or something else is happening on the server at the moment.

When you test the software on your own server, and find specific issues, please do report them to us. A general "the site seems slow" topic isn't too overly helpful on it's own, however, I'm afraid. :)

That's something I've thought about and would like to do, but it's challenging. If a site had some major database issue one day, the log file could easily be 20MB in size....that would be difficult to handle resource-wise from the ACP, not figuring in things like pagination and what not.

As a result of this topic, I'm curious how hard it would be to create the skin changes necessary to display the data how you want. I can't say whether any of that would be available by default with IPB (since I don't control the skinning), but perhaps if we supplied the necessary changes to make the search look the way you are used to, would that be an acceptable compromise? i.e. either through the resource site, or some other similar manner?

I think with maybe 30 minutes tonight of my own time I can come up with something that resembles the 2.x style. I wouldn't want to spend my time doing that if it's not something you'd ultimately be interested in (i.e. if you would only be happy if it is released by default in IPB). That is, just to show you that I'm not ignoring what you're saying, even if I don't agree personally. :)

Nice idea.

Remember, this is a "1.0" release of the hooks system. We wanted to keep it mostly simple (but make it as powerful as possible) so that we could gauge what would be useful to both modders and users alike, before going on a rampage trying to incorporate a bunch of things no one would ever use.

We'd also like to give modders a way to handle the updates through the resource site at some point, but haven't worked out details on that yet.

Nice idea.

Remember, this is a "1.0" release of the hooks system. We wanted to keep it mostly simple (but make it as powerful as possible) so that we could gauge what would be useful to both modders and users alike, before going on a rampage trying to incorporate a bunch of things no one would ever use.

We'd also like to give modders a way to handle the updates through the resource site at some point, but haven't worked out details on that yet.

Nice idea.

Remember, this is a "1.0" release of the hooks system. We wanted to keep it mostly simple (but make it as powerful as possible) so that we could gauge what would be useful to both modders and users alike, before going on a rampage trying to incorporate a bunch of things no one would ever use.

We'd also like to give modders a way to handle the updates through the resource site at some point, but haven't worked out details on that yet.

I was thinking the same thing yesterday....

Fixed

I hope we don't get to an RC4. I might cry if we did. >_<

Unfortunately, guys, despite the laborious and time-consuming testing we do locally, it's just not the same as testing on a box with hundreds (sometimes thousands) of users online and millions of posts. Basically, this is a real world situation. We need to do real world testing at times.

We'd rather do it here, on our own site, and get IPB3 working as good as we possibly can, than release IPB to you guys with slow functions and so forth. Just look at it this way - we're doing the testing here, where we can control, debug, monitor and fix it, to save you trouble down the road. :)

Unfortunately, guys, despite the laborious and time-consuming testing we do locally, it's just not the same as testing on a box with hundreds (sometimes thousands) of users online and millions of posts. Basically, this is a real world situation. We need to do real world testing at times.

We'd rather do it here, on our own site, and get IPB3 working as good as we possibly can, than release IPB to you guys with slow functions and so forth. Just look at it this way - we're doing the testing here, where we can control, debug, monitor and fix it, to save you trouble down the road. :)

Unfortunately, guys, despite the laborious and time-consuming testing we do locally, it's just not the same as testing on a box with hundreds (sometimes thousands) of users online and millions of posts. Basically, this is a real world situation. We need to do real world testing at times.

We'd rather do it here, on our own site, and get IPB3 working as good as we possibly can, than release IPB to you guys with slow functions and so forth. Just look at it this way - we're doing the testing here, where we can control, debug, monitor and fix it, to save you trouble down the road. :)

Unfortunately, guys, despite the laborious and time-consuming testing we do locally, it's just not the same as testing on a box with hundreds (sometimes thousands) of users online and millions of posts. Basically, this is a real world situation. We need to do real world testing at times.

We'd rather do it here, on our own site, and get IPB3 working as good as we possibly can, than release IPB to you guys with slow functions and so forth. Just look at it this way - we're doing the testing here, where we can control, debug, monitor and fix it, to save you trouble down the road. :)

Deleting all posts is a fairly resource intensive action, particularly if the member has made a lot of posts. For each post you delete, you may need to rebuild the topic it was in (in case that post was the first or last post in the topic), and then you need to rebuild all forum data for all forums they posted in (so that the number of topics and posts in each is accurate), and then you need to rebuild the forum stats (so the total number of posts is accurate). When you delete all members' posts from the ACP, it does it in cycles of 50 posts, and redirects to a new page automatically where it does the next 50. You'd have to program something into the warn panel to be able to replicate this, as deleting all posts from someone who made 5,000 posts on the forums could not be done all in one shot.

I would say that for the frequency of how often most folks need to do this, and this is just going off my experience here, it's enough that an Admin can do this option in the ACP as it comes up. Whenever I have needed to delete all posts from one member, I wasn't doing it when I was just warning them, I was doing it when I was banning them via the ACP, where I would have the ability to delete all of their posts right there anyway. Just my 2 cents.