Jump to content



  • Content Count

  • Joined


About Haku2

  • Rank
    Community Regular

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

17,475 profile views
  1. I thought one of the main goals of IP.Suite 4 was to keep the features consistent throughout all of the applications of the suite. I don't doubt that this feature will make it to the Downloads application eventually, as it's very much needed, especially for paid downloads of the application, where marketing is especially important, but I'm a bit disappointed that I'm still seeing these inconsistencies.
  2. I think that with no operator specified, both an "and" and an "or" operator search on the terms should be executed, with the "and" operator search results being given a score boost in the final search results that are shown to the user. Wouldn't this make more sense?
  3. @LindyI believe you were looking for feedback on how the search utility could be improved and this topic provides at least some very important insight on how some aspects of the utility could be improved. If you could take a peek in here and forward this concern to the development team for review and discussion, it would be greatly appreciated.
  4. Why is it that we're prevented from including a Pages database on more than one page? It seems very restricting and I'm not sure why that restriction was put in place. I know the reason that the one database per page limit was put in place due to concerns about performance, but it seems this restriction was just put in arbitrarily. Could this restriction please be removed at some point? Would there be any negative side-effects if I were to go into the code and remove the restriction myself?
  5. I would rather a self-hosted solution replace the current chat application as it would be more cost-effective in the long-term and give me more control. Please look into ArrowChat.
  6. It's a bit disappointing that Downloads as well as other official applications of the suite are still missing basic statistics reporting, but I'm glad to know it will be coming back at some point. Thank you for keeping us updated.
  7. I also believe more extensive filtering options and a powerful bulk handling system for items(tickets, products, etc.) is needed. I know that even the forums are still missing these elements and I believe it was said that these elements would be introduced to the forums at some point, but being able to quickly manage multiple tickets and adjust the price of many items at once is a necessity for an e-commerce system.
  8. @ZackL, I'm a bit unsure of what your suggestion is as simply assigning sub-directories to users, while definitely possible with custom code, is very insecure without a proper isolation platform/software in place. Without each individual directory being properly virtualized or jailed, there's too many possibilities that your clients or your clients' visitors can execute dangerous commands or access system (or another user's) files through PHP, CGI, SSI, Perl or Shell files, htaccess, FTP, or whatever else you're making available to them. And, I don't think there's a clean way of enforcing disk
  9. Hi @Lindy, I'm more comfortable with Sphinx, but whatever works best would be preferred as long as my community doesn't need to rely on any external third-party services or resources for the Sphinx-alternative to work. Kind Regards, Haku
  10. I'm interested in knowing this as well. It might be worth submitting a bug report about this as I wouldn't expect this to be intended functionality and has the potential to become a large annoyance to certain moderators in your community, inhibiting their ability to do their job well.
  11. Yes - to me, it was one of the best features of the 3.x series. It kept posts with attachments very neat and visually appealing. In posts with attachments in 4.x, the posts are very bland and you can't even tell for sure if the link you're clicking on is an attachment (if you've even managed to find the link(s) in the case of a large post with mostly text), what the file type is, how popular it is (for both worthiness and reputation purposes), or whether it was uploaded via the website (especially if CDNs are in use). Thank you for pointing us all to the appropriate plugin, but as you
  12. Thank you very much for this quick fix @opentype! It is still somewhat very limiting in what can be done with it without at least a few more dirty quick fixes, at least for my use cases, but it definitely provides for a much better aesthetic appearance than before. Thank you @Lindy. I know this may be a bit difficult to squeeze into 4.1.11 due to other, more critical pending items (features, bugs, etc.), but I very much look forward to seeing this implemented somewhere in the next few releases of IP.Pages.
  13. I have to agree with you @chilihead. There is definitely a perfectly sensible use case for what you are suggesting and the permissions system should work that way. Hopefully, @Lindy will reconsider his decision to implement your suggestion in the near future.
  14. Hi, I'm just bumping this topic because this issue is very important to me. Any kind of word on whether this will be addressed in a future version would be greatly appreciated. Kind Regards, Haku
  15. @icedream, have you been able to come up with an alternative solution in regards to a self-hosted CAPTCHA (perhaps a custom modification)? I'm still contemplating on whether to use IP.Suite 4.x or IP.Board 3.4.9 for an upcoming project, and this is an important factor in my decision.
  • 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