Development Discussion Board

rssfed23 wrote: Yeah, why would we want to delay a new version,
i was just wondering because it seems pretty stable on this board and when i try to run the CVS versions it dosent work very well

I am using and working on a copy of the CVS version, I have never had a problem yet. Where do you see problems?

Opcode caching is great, sometimes. It becomes quite a bit stricter, you DO write better code because of it (you release things that you nolonger need, like query data etc.) Other times, it just breaks software. Not good.

Let me make this grossly exagerated scenario. Lets say we are given two super computers. They are both fully setup and expanded Blue Gene-L machines. The server computer will use its algorithm to turn the page into something much smaller. Smaller means less data to transfer. With our horribly powerf...

its fairly simple to fix, you get the smilie data from the cache, find what codes are used and refuse to allow them in. A regex would do no good because it would be too general.

But you would have to do that for each and every theme. Or you could setup custom bbcodes. (Custom bbcodes should be theme-able, have a certain style for a template... Drat)

You would still have to do it for each template. And you would have to pray that most template makers are sane and write similar templates. The situation is not as bad, me and a few of my friends made... Solutions to that problem.

The reason why groups may work better here then on CVS is because they have either applied small hacks to the code to get it to work or they are using a more stable revision of the CVS here. Listen, there is a reason why CVS is used, it tracks changes. It would be fairly difficult to track changes m...

There is no reason within the phpBB software to make it faster now then before. I am nearly positive they don't run the latest and greatest here. Also, no large changes to the architecture have been made in the last four months that would make it go faster. Since a hearty portion of phpBB has been r...

Well, we don't have a plug-in system like that in 2.2 so the issue is somewhat moot. However the situation you describe could be solved by simply allowing vars within the INCLUDE directive, e.g. <!-- INCLUDE {loop.MODULE} --> Nothing like quoting a post from nearly two years ago. Anyway, what happe...

I would say that for the most part, the template engine is done. The last few updates to it were, at best, trivial. The last substantial change would only be used by enuthiasts (no normal person needs to alter block data). Sessions has been changing but only to make things in the core easier to do, ...