[RFC|Rejected] Removal of subsilver2

[Phil]

Thing is they've had time, ever since phpBB3 came out. To me the fact that there is a bit more ss2 styles than prosilver styles just means that there was some transitioning from phpBB2 (subsilver) to phpBB3 (prosilver) and during that transition there have been users favoring ss2 just because that's what they were used to in the previous version. Thus I think we'd have a hard time saying not to remove subsilver2 from 3.1.

The problem with this, though, is that have felt no need to move away from subsilver2 and most users expected (quite reasonably, in my opinion) that subsilver2 would not be dropped without significant public discussion and prior notice -- neither of these happened unfortunately.

Regarding your reasoning behind the fact that there are more subsilver2 styles than prosilver, I understand where your thinking is coming from, but I am very hesitant to draw such conclusions without having actually done some research/surveying into the matter first. The fact of the matter is that we do not know why users are not adopting prosilver, and in order to proceed in a reasonable matter, this information needs to be gathered. Until it has happened, I do not see how we can remove subsilver2 with a clean conscience.

[naderman]

Thing is they've had time, ever since phpBB3 came out. To me the fact that there is a bit more ss2 styles than prosilver styles just means that there was some transitioning from phpBB2 (subsilver) to phpBB3 (prosilver) and during that transition there have been users favoring ss2 just because that's what they were used to in the previous version. Thus I think we'd have a hard time saying not to remove subsilver2 from 3.1.

The problem with this, though, is that have felt no need to move away from subsilver2 and most users expected (quite reasonably, in my opinion) that subsilver2 would not be dropped without significant public discussion and prior notice -- neither of these happened unfortunately.

Hello? What exactly are you doing here if not discussing it publically before it happens? 3.1 has not been released and there is plenty of space here to discuss, just like you are doing?

I would like to point out that, the number of people who use a style or the number of custom styles based on a style are not reasons to make a decision either way. There have been numerous suggestions in this topic how to deal with users who are currently using subsilver2 and nobody intends to just ignore them. So dropping subsilver2 from the official package as a style installed by default does not necessarily mean a problem for these people at all. Like I already explained in my previous posts there are other options. If people feel that support & maintenance by a third party is not sufficient, we can offer that without including subsilver2 by default. We can also focus on improving prosilver so that the problems some people have with prosilver are fixed. They might then prefer to base their styles on prosilver anyway. By not shipping subsilver2 with phpBB we will certainly decrease the number of subsilver2 users on new installs, while we can still provide suitable options for people already using subsilver2.

[Phil]

Hello? What exactly are you doing here if not discussing it publically before it happens? 3.1 has not been released and there is plenty of space here to discuss, just like you are doing?

This discussion is occurring after the fact and is causing the RFC to be reconsidered. In a perfect world, it would have happened before the RFC was accepted/merged. Edit: I would like to point out that I am not trying to beat a dead horse here. Instead, I am attempting to point out that the original decision was made based on a flawed and limited process. Now that Area51 is given more prominent attention on phpBB.com I hope that this will not be an issue in the future.

I would like to point out that, the number of people who use a style or the number of custom styles based on a style are not reasons to make a decision either way.

Then what is a basis for decision? In this instance, such evidence clearly indicates that subsilver2 holds an important position in the phpBB styling paradigm. As I have said previously, I believe that the reasoning behind this fact should be considered and addressed before subsilver2 is removed.

[DarkBeing]

Just thought I throw in another thought.

If everything runs smothly phpBB3.1 is supposed to see the light at the end of this year, which would be in about 5 months. Now Acyd Burns posted back in 2009:

We plan to have up to two supported branches at any given time; a stable branch (currently 3.0.x) and a feature branch (planned 3.1.x). Stable branches will continue to be supported for around 6-9 months after the date of a new feature release. Exact dates will be announced well in advance to provide MOD and Style authors with the ability to coordinate the releases of their own packages.

To my understanding it means that SS2 would be at least additionally 6-9 months officially supported after the release. That would give the community and the team at least a year to:

- "fix" prosilver speed and usability (css clean-up)
- time for style authors to update their styles on a prosilver base (or on the base of a possible community SS2)
- the community to realease a community stupported version of SS2 if wanted (there are already people willing to do that)
- enough time to have a as smooth as possible transition from SS2 to PS

[FeyFre]

That would give the community and the team at least a year to:

- "fix" prosilver speed and usability (css clean-up)
- time for style authors to update their styles on a prosilver base (or on the base of a possible community SS2)
- the community to realease a community stupported version of SS2 if wanted (there are already people willing to do that)
- enough time to have a as smooth as possible transition from SS2 to PS

You forgotten:

- migrate to other forum engine
- write own engine

Neither of this cases good for phpBB itself.

[swanny007]

Well since you are dropping subsilver2, the least you can do is include a mobile-friendly style that auto-detects the browser/visitor. Mobile is the future of the web, and it would be nice to have a mobile-friendly site without MODs.

[MattF]

You forgotten:

- migrate to other forum engine
- write own engine

Neither of this cases good for phpBB itself.

I think if an admin decides to migrate to another forum software because of losing subsilver2... they have issues
honestly, for free forum software, phpBB dominates and the alternatives are real slim pickings...

The first five minutes in Prosilver is shocking... Spend a day, and you get used to it. After a week subsilver2 looks incredibly out-dated, like it should be shelved beside IE6 and Netscape 9.

The best things about dropping subsilver2, as has been mentioned before:
-Currently, the burden of carrying subsilver2 is on the Admins, phpBB Dev and support teams, MOD authors, and Style Authors.
-Dropping subsilver2 will mean the burden of it will be carried only by those Style Authors and Admins who wish to continue working with it.
-The most exciting Web-2.0-like styles coming from the style authors are Prosilver-based styles (like Absolution, CA Vintage, CA Halcyon)

It's time to move forward - not sideways

[Oleg]

I went through the first several pages of this topic looking for reasons for and against removal of subsilver. Then I compared them to the list that naderman posted:

In favour of removing subsilver2:
[*]Reasons given (some are very subjective)

• Saves (unquantifiable) work for developers
• Saves work for MOD authors, who want to make their MOD available to a majority of phpBB users, if all or most styles are based on a common template
• There is a style looking like subsilver2 based on prosilver, one like it could be shipped with Ascraeus as subsilver3
• A third party could maintain subsilver2 for Ascraeus, for those already using subsilver2 with Olympus
• New styles get based on legacy subsilver2 which was never meant to be the official phpBB3 style, but was only shipped with phpBB because it was already there
• CSS based design is more flexible and should be the case for all styles shipped with phpBB
• Prosilver takes some getting used to, that's a big reason why people pick subsilver, if it didn't come by default, they would soon realise that prosilver is superior

Emphasized line is the only requirement that subsilver imposes on anyone. All other lines are not requirements: if you as a mod author don't want to support subsilver, you don't have to. If you don't like the look of it, you don't need to install it on your board. Etc.

Now, a certain portion of phpbb userbase like subsilver for one reason or another and want it to continue exist, for now.

Going back to the first few pages of this topic I didn't get the impression that supporting subsilver is a big burden for those who posted. Yes, it's extra work, but it's not earth shattering. Considering that people who want subsilver really want it I think you should just put it back, address performance issues with prosilver, create subsilver3 based on prosilver, get those users who currently prefer subsilver to move to subsilver3 and then drop current subsilver. It's the nice thing to do. It's not like you have deadlines and must cut features to make them.

[MattF]

if you as a mod author don't want to support subsilver, you don't have to.

Are you a MOD author? Because I can tell you two things will happen if you do not support subsilver2.
1) You will get requests right away to make your MOD support subsilver2
2) You will not get as many downloads of your MOD if you do not support subsilver2

In other words, any MOD author who gives a damn about the time and effort they spent on their mod MUST support subsilver2. Many boards have a mixture of subsilver2 and prosilver styles available to their users. That means those boards can't even try to install prosilver only MODs or risk potential board failures for their subsilver2 style users.

Considering that people who want subsilver really want it I think you should just put it back

As they have said repeatedly, subsilver2 is not going to disappear. It will in effect be just another optional style in the style database that anybody can install and use on their board. It's antiquated template/style structure just won't be further supported/developed by phpBB in the 3.1 branch. People can continue using subsilver2 and its "offspring" styles for years to come, as long as the community supports and maintains it.

Now, while the idea of relying on the community to continue supporting subsilver2 might seem like a dead end to some, remember that all of phpBB and its development is now a community effort. So all this really means is, those who like subsilver2 must now, man-up, and support and maintain it - I guess we'll see just how much people really want it when it becomes their responsibility to fly its flag.

[FeyFre]

create subsilver3 based on prosilver, get those users who currently prefer subsilver to move to subsilver3 and then drop current subsilver.

Do you really think SS3 will be as good as SS2, especially when it will be based on prosilver? Will it fulfil all requirements of users who choose SS2? I have choosen SS2 not because of PS is bad for me, but because SS2 is good for me. So will be SS3 good enough good for me or somebody else? Probably not.

About support of SS by community:
I think it is impossible. Because phpbb team will probably take care how to create output suitable for PS and probably this output will be unable to optimize for other styles.
Users, skilled in XHTML/JS/CSS enough to support SS2 probably will no do that. Because they using phpbb not because they have time to have fun, but because they require it. They able support SS2 at level of their requirements independely, but they probably will never take care to lose time to share their work to other part of community.