sadams101

If you are selling your house, you want to get the best possible price. If you place lots of ads in the newspaper and social media and have loads of people show up, you are NOT guaranteed the best price if your house "looks" undervalued.
The CSS Project is akin to advertising and the continued improvement of the suite will go a long way towards upping the site's overall perceived value.  Also known as "curb appeal".
It doesn't do us much good having lots of folks knock on our door if they immediately walk away to check out one of the other bright and shiny houses down the street.

Wouldn't it be easier on your staff, third-party developers and customers to improve upon CSS in a phased approach?
Why not break down the CSS Project into sub-projects? 
One sub-project you concentrate your attention on commerce.  You develop the "new" features you want to offer for that module while addressing any appropriate CSS changes needed.  You concentrate many IPS developer's and testers eyes on just that section of your overall codebase.
By concentrating "lots" of eyes on "one" module of the suite you will make it easier to identify any underlying performance, security problems or bugs. At the end of such a CSS sub project, you will end up with a much better underlying codebase then trying to tackle the entire suite all at once. Once that CSS sub project is "golden" you move on to the next sub-project
Upon release of the "CSS Project - Sub Project X" the third-party developers, theme designers and your customer base only have to make appropriate changes to "one" section of the IPS suite not the entire suite. 
By adopting a more phased approach you will significantly lighten the load and make it much less stressful on your third-party developers, theme designers and your customer base.

They are all marked as compatible, but IPS still needs to approve it. 

No, it is not automatic. but yes, almost all of my resources are compatible even by current versions with IPS 4.7...
Nonetheless, I have recently submitted updated versions/marked as compatible of all of my resources, and they are awaiting for approval. Including Mobile Navigation.

I recently upgraded to 4.7 and noticed that several of your plugins that I run now say they are not compatible with 4.7, including:
SuperBlocks 1.2.0 Enhanced Forum Views 1.4.1 SuperTopics 1.1.0 SuperGrid 3.2.0 Each one appears to be functioning in 4.7, so perhaps IPB automatically flags all plugins as non-compatible until the author checks off that their plugin is compatible?
In any case, do you know when those plugins will be marked as compatible, or an updated version will be available?

This issue has been resolved in 4.7.0 which has recently been released. Please upgrade to that version to resolve this, and of course, let us know if you are still seeing any issues.

For years IPB has promised site speed increases, and every one that you've delivered to date has turned out to be too little, too late--at least for anyone who is concerned at all about their Google rankings.
Here is a speed test of this very forum thread--and you use CDN with zero ads running--you score a 51%, which is an F for FAILURE:

 
After mostly CSS changes made with the ability to edit CSS files directly--the feature you just took away from everyone (and with the help of @Adlago), here is a similar forum thread on my site--I have no CDN and am running a large number of graphical ads:

What you see here is a site with mostly CSS changes, and it scores 25% faster than a site that is on a CDN with no ads. How is that possible? Perhaps you need to hire @Adlago because apparently speed improvements are still not on your radar, and now you've gone out of your way to strip the ability for those of us who actually care about this issue to be able to do something about it ourselves.

I also cannot believe that you've removed this, and, after more than 15 years, and also looking at alternative boards to import my site into...totally unacceptable!
Your site speed is absolutely horrid...the only way I've been able to make my site get even average speed scores has been through extensive modification of CSS--now you've removed this ability from my--WHY??!!

For years IPB has promised site speed increases, and every one that you've delivered to date has turned out to be too little, too late--at least for anyone who is concerned at all about their Google rankings.
Here is a speed test of this very forum thread--and you use CDN with zero ads running--you score a 51%, which is an F for FAILURE:

 
After mostly CSS changes made with the ability to edit CSS files directly--the feature you just took away from everyone (and with the help of @Adlago), here is a similar forum thread on my site--I have no CDN and am running a large number of graphical ads:

What you see here is a site with mostly CSS changes, and it scores 25% faster than a site that is on a CDN with no ads. How is that possible? Perhaps you need to hire @Adlago because apparently speed improvements are still not on your radar, and now you've gone out of your way to strip the ability for those of us who actually care about this issue to be able to do something about it ourselves.

I also cannot believe that you've removed this, and, after more than 15 years, and also looking at alternative boards to import my site into...totally unacceptable!
Your site speed is absolutely horrid...the only way I've been able to make my site get even average speed scores has been through extensive modification of CSS--now you've removed this ability from my--WHY??!!

I also cannot believe that you've removed this, and, after more than 15 years, and also looking at alternative boards to import my site into...totally unacceptable!
Your site speed is absolutely horrid...the only way I've been able to make my site get even average speed scores has been through extensive modification of CSS--now you've removed this ability from my--WHY??!!

I also cannot believe that you've removed this, and, after more than 15 years, and also looking at alternative boards to import my site into...totally unacceptable!
Your site speed is absolutely horrid...the only way I've been able to make my site get even average speed scores has been through extensive modification of CSS--now you've removed this ability from my--WHY??!!

That is the item count of articles currently available to view within that area. 3 of the ones you can see yourself are not visible to anyone else as they are scheduled and not yet published

A fix for this has been submitted for review and should be in the 4.7.1 release unless there are issues in testing.

Also note that once IPS announces support for 8.1 anyone using third-party apps will have to be assured each and every app is fully 8.1 compliant.  There will likely be a lag between official IPS support and every app getting updated (if needed).  There are lots of great new features in 8.1 that some developers may want to take advantage of to take their apps to the next level.  This upcoming PHP version will likely be a bumpy ride, but hopefully worth it in the long term.

You are very right. But it is also true that you are lagging behind. Unfortunately.🙂
 

Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention! I can confirm this should be further reviewed and I have logged an internal bug report for our development team to investigate and address as necessary, in a future maintenance release.
 

It's possible that google news changed their formatting requirements. I'll look into this and report back if that is the case. 

Personally while it may be an issue, it’s not a critical one and anywhere near the top of the list of things that are important to fix. 

If this really is important to you, make your voice heard to the group that is actually writing it. While IPB can make a post asking for it, if tons of other people do it as well, it’s more likely to happen. Just like y’all are trying to say here. 😉
This has existed since 2020 for jQuery which has a MUUUUCH bigger user base than even all of IPS.  People are obviously not clamoring to them to fix it. So it needs more attention. 🙂 

I think it's a good idea to be more specific, and certainly adding "sponsored" is very important to be able to do, so that google knows a link is sponsored. Now it can be "sponsored" without "nofollow" and still be fine with google. 
For all my forum links and comment links I decided this was best because it is more specific: "external ugc nofollow."
Google indicates on that page that forums, for example, can use "ugc" to indicate that it is user generated, which is different than just nofollow, which doesn't tell you anything (it could be nofollow because it is sponsored, so now google cannot tell whether it is sponsored or flagged nofollow because it is UGC).
Interestingly google also says that for "trusted" users, for example old forum members who regularly post good links it is ok to remove the "nofollow" on them. So there really should be a setting where you can set the default for all users, but then go in and change them for selected users, or perhaps even make it tied to advancing to a certain group, for example those who have over 100 posts will have the "nofollow" removed.
Just some ideas, but what is clear is that google cannot now tell whether a link is nofollow because it is sponsored, or just UGC, and it is important to tell google this. By adding the UGC tag I've done that.

I have added indexnow today, so it should be found in the next release;)
I think that searching for "tag manager" should already link to the integrations page.

Because the plugin needs to load additional content from the topics, but if the expected posts aren’t there, it breaks. 

But if there are no PHP errors when running it, then it is compatible. PHP writes new versions to be backwards compatible, and in some instances they remove deprecated code that is no longer compatible--this causes errors and things to break if you still use such code. I guess what I'm saying is that if nothing breaks, and there are no errors, then what would be the concern with running it now?
PS - There were tons of issues for me running PHP 8.0, and I had to upgrade many custom plugins and apps. Besides the cache issue, which turned out to be a problem with my Redis installation on PHP 8.1, I have not seen any errors at all when running PHP 8.1.

We have not done compatibility testing. Therefore, things may work but if you run into an issue as you've done here, our advisement would be to downgrade as we investigate the issue.

Well it was all going fine, no problems, but after reading here it wasn't compatible (I missed that when I installed 4.6.x) I reverted back to 8.0.x as I like an easy life......