Dll

Something has to give with these notifications. Members who want to receive reply notifications are getting literally hundreds of emails a day because a post they make gets a lot of reactions. 
Ultimately that's making them decide to switch off their email notifications entirely....

We're getting complaints from users that although they want notifications for things like replies and mentions, they don't want or need them for reactions to posts. It would be useful to be able to give them that option. 

We're getting complaints from users that although they want notifications for things like replies and mentions, they don't want or need them for reactions to posts. It would be useful to be able to give them that option. 

Something has to give with these notifications. Members who want to receive reply notifications are getting literally hundreds of emails a day because a post they make gets a lot of reactions. 
Ultimately that's making them decide to switch off their email notifications entirely....

There's a chance it was rejected. 

Mostly by not getting hung up on page speed score tests and worrying more about user experience, I expect.
 

It needs to be better integrated into the community. I'd like to see an option where a user can choose to post an image to the gallery at the same time as they upload it into a post. 

It needs to be better integrated into the community. I'd like to see an option where a user can choose to post an image to the gallery at the same time as they upload it into a post. 

We're getting complaints from users that although they want notifications for things like replies and mentions, they don't want or need them for reactions to posts. It would be useful to be able to give them that option. 

The net result of this is that people switch off their email notifications so as not to get the notifications they don't want. Bundling together replies, mentions and reactions is a real backward step, and is going to actually end up reducing people's engagement over time. I assume that's not what you had planned @Matt - please look into changing it and allowing people more control, other than stopping their notifications entirely.

We're getting complaints from users that although they want notifications for things like replies and mentions, they don't want or need them for reactions to posts. It would be useful to be able to give them that option. 

We're getting complaints from users that although they want notifications for things like replies and mentions, they don't want or need them for reactions to posts. It would be useful to be able to give them that option. 

We're getting complaints from users that although they want notifications for things like replies and mentions, they don't want or need them for reactions to posts. It would be useful to be able to give them that option. 

You really need to think more about real users rather than just online test results. 

Http/2 actually means that using a cookieless domain isn't worth the pay off any more. Previously, the concern was the additional bandwidth and therefore loss of speed by including a few kb of cookies in each request. But now with http/2 the additional overhead of making a new connection, the lookup, the ssl handshake etc is actually slower than having everything requested off of the same domain, even if that means each request includes cookies - particularly since http/2 compresses them.
https://blog.theodo.com/2019/09/cookieless-domain-http2-world/
https://www.hostnexus.com/blog/http2-site-optimization/
So, the optimal way to do it would appear to be to drop the cookieless domain entirely. 
 
 

Http/2 actually means that using a cookieless domain isn't worth the pay off any more. Previously, the concern was the additional bandwidth and therefore loss of speed by including a few kb of cookies in each request. But now with http/2 the additional overhead of making a new connection, the lookup, the ssl handshake etc is actually slower than having everything requested off of the same domain, even if that means each request includes cookies - particularly since http/2 compresses them.
https://blog.theodo.com/2019/09/cookieless-domain-http2-world/
https://www.hostnexus.com/blog/http2-site-optimization/
So, the optimal way to do it would appear to be to drop the cookieless domain entirely. 
 
 

You really need to think more about real users rather than just online test results. 

Many of those tools were built pre-http/2. Read the links I posted (and there are numerous more on the net), most people think that http/2 negates the need for a cookieless domain. It doesn't hurt much to use one though, if you already are. 
On top of this, the manifest file is best on the root domain of the site as it can cause CORS issues if not. For a developer, it's easy to work around and put a policy in place for, but I can see why Invision would keep it on the root domain since it ensures it'll work out of the box. 

Http/2 actually means that using a cookieless domain isn't worth the pay off any more. Previously, the concern was the additional bandwidth and therefore loss of speed by including a few kb of cookies in each request. But now with http/2 the additional overhead of making a new connection, the lookup, the ssl handshake etc is actually slower than having everything requested off of the same domain, even if that means each request includes cookies - particularly since http/2 compresses them.
https://blog.theodo.com/2019/09/cookieless-domain-http2-world/
https://www.hostnexus.com/blog/http2-site-optimization/
So, the optimal way to do it would appear to be to drop the cookieless domain entirely. 
 
 

In theory, yes, but I’m not gonna do that. A) it would double the amount of code to maintain. B) There are several load-time saving measures included already. C) a higher-res image isn’t necessarily too big on mobile devices, since the screen resolutions are getting higher and higher on mobile. 

You really need to think more about real users rather than just online test results. 

Setting this aside, the manifest file is generated dynamically based on various setting, rather than as a static file. Moving it to a cookie-less domain would require downloading a static file every time any of those settings have changed (of which, there are many spread throughout the suite).

Hi @TheJackal84 - any luck with a fix for the sending to guest bug above please?

Confirming.

You really need to think more about real users rather than just online test results.