phpBB 3.2

Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here.
Forum rules
Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here. Feature requests are closed.
Post Reply
User avatar
Highway of Life
Registered User
Posts: 1399
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: I'd love to change the World, but they won't give me the Source Code
Contact:

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by Highway of Life »

Otra, nobody is forcing you to use phpBB, or phpBB3.
If you don’t want to use it, that’s fine, there are plenty of other forum software packages out there to choose from,
and probably have what you want as a default feature if you don’t feel like installing any MODs.

We don’t pay for phpBB, so we hardly have a right to “demand” features.
Other packages will install whatever you want, because you pay for it.

If you really want something that bad, don’t demand it, ask a MOD developer once phpBB3 is released. ;)
It doesn’t do any good to whine about it... phpBB is not going to change their mind on this right now.
Image
User avatar
Eelke
Registered User
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Bussum, NL
Contact:

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by Eelke »

Otra wrote: I could have sworn they were making this for us, and not for them.

Really? And why would you figure they'd be doing that? Are you paying them to? Nope. So what are they doing it for? To make you happy?

I have news. They are doing it for themselves, and they just happen to be so good that they are willing to share.
User avatar
Nicholas the Italian
Registered User
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 11:19 pm
Location: 46°8' N, 12°13' E
Contact:

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by Nicholas the Italian »

Eelke wrote: I have news. They are doing it for themselves, and they just happen to be so good that they are willing to share.

Oh well, I hope they're not doing this just for themselves, otherwise they'd better spend their time on other activities.
But, for the fact that they're not paid for it (other thread...), they can choose the balance they prefer between doing what they want and what users ask for.
User avatar
Eelke
Registered User
Posts: 606
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Bussum, NL
Contact:

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by Eelke »

The world isn't black and white, but making it appear so helps getting points across...
SamG
Registered User
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:35 pm

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by SamG »

Nicholas the Italian wrote: [T]hey can choose the balance they prefer between doing what they want and what users ask for.

In practice, I think that's how it works out, to one degree or another. But that doesn't address Eelke's point at all, as far as I can see. It's still the phpBB Group making the deliberate choice.

I think the same is true of many/most phpBB MOD and theme authors. They work on something for their own purposes and then elect to share their work with the community. They may get feedback, may make changes, and may release new versions with new features, yet they seldom seem to get to the point where what they're doing is for just us. More often, the original author defines the scope and limits of the project, and when it ceases to be useful to the original author, the project is either dropped or passed on to others.

So I think Eelke's point is to the point. Like others, I've disagreed with feature set decisions and even scratched my head over them from time to time. But no matter how much I may have disagreed with any given decision, it's always been clear to me that the project direction is not community property, and that's just part of what phpBB is.

In any case, I think it makes more sense to build on the benefits phpBB as a project and as a product offers (or move on) rather than fixate ad nauseam on whatever seems to be missing.
"I hate trolls!" - Willow Ufgood
User avatar
Highway of Life
Registered User
Posts: 1399
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: I'd love to change the World, but they won't give me the Source Code
Contact:

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by Highway of Life »

SamG wrote: I think the same is true of many/most phpBB MOD and theme authors. They work on something for their own purposes and then elect to share their work with the community. They may get feedback, may make changes, and may release new versions with new features, yet they seldom seem to get to the point where what they're doing is for just us. More often, the original author defines the scope and limits of the project, and when it ceases to be useful to the original author, the project is either dropped or passed on to others.
Although this is probably the case with many MOD Authors, but for the one’s that create a lot of MODs, I have a feeling they don’t do it all for themselves.
For example, about 15% of the MODs I have created for phpBB3 I don’t even use myself...
Although I must admit that I’m more likely to create a MOD that I want to use, it’s not always the case.
SamG wrote: So I think Eelke's point is to the point. Like others, I've disagreed with feature set decisions and even scratched my head over them from time to time. But no matter how much I may have disagreed with any given decision, it's always been clear to me that the project direction is not community property, and that's just part of what phpBB is.
I would agree with that, except that they did take Feature Requests for a long time, then debating which ones they wanted to add.
Now, I was not there at that time, but I get the impressions some features, such as the quick reply were not requested very often.
And there have always been a large degree of debates that arise from features such as AJAX implemented features, Quick Reply, and a few others... and then there are those that just where not around during Feature Requests.
SamG wrote: In any case, I think it makes more sense to build on the benefits phpBB as a project and as a product offers rather than fixate ad nauseam on whatever seems to be missing.
Indeed! And many people are too caught up in what they want to be happy about what is actually there... and what is available.
"nauseam" is that a word? :?
Image
SamG
Registered User
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:35 pm

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by SamG »

Highway of Life wrote: Although this is probably the case with many MOD Authors, but for the one’s that create a lot of MODs, I have a feeling they don’t do it all for themselves.

Whether your feeling is accurate or not, I don't disgree with it. I did take a bit of care to say things like "many/most" and "more often [than not]."
Highway of Life wrote: I would agree with that, except that they did take Feature Requests for a long time, then debating which ones they wanted to add.

I was talking about final decisions. For example, I was really at a loss to understand why a printer friendly version of threads or why member lists closed to guests was rejected for phpBB 2.0. I got over it. And, apparently, so did they. :)
Highway of Life wrote: "nauseam" is that a word? :?

Yes. :mrgreen:
"I hate trolls!" - Willow Ufgood
User avatar
Nicholas the Italian
Registered User
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 11:19 pm
Location: 46°8' N, 12°13' E
Contact:

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by Nicholas the Italian »

SamG wrote: In practice, I think that's how it works out, to one degree or another. But that doesn't address Eelke's point at all, as far as I can see. It's still the phpBB Group making the deliberate choice.

Eelke already clarified his point.
I just wanted to say that, if I want to create something, a product, to be shared with others, even if I make it for free and for hobby, I'm obviously interested in it having some success. I and a friend of mine built and manage (as a hobby) a website; of course we decide what goes into it and what doesn't, and of course we're interested in what users want and try to satisfy most of them, still following the guidelines that we chose. It's also a pleasure to feel like you're of some help to others, especially when people appreciate your work. So, you got to find a balance.
If we put into it only what we wanted, that wouldn't be a site, that would be a personal homepage. If phpBB team only followed their own interests, regardless of the community requests, they'd better find a more proficuous way to spend their time. But they don't, as far as I can see.
Of course we may questionate some of their choices; but they simply don't work for us. They're just an indipendent party offering a product and saying, "if you like it, get it, and any suggestion will be welcome; if you don't, find something that fits you better and good luck".
HoL wrote: "nauseam" is that a word?

"ad nauseam", latin expression... until you feel sick ;)
And many people are too caught up in what they want to be happy about what is actually there... and what is available.

"Happiness is not getting what you want, but wanting what you got..." (Anonymous from Somewhere)

(Uhm... topic review here under... weren't messages ordered from newest to oldest once?)
SamG
Registered User
Posts: 1241
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:35 pm

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by SamG »

Nicholas the Italian wrote: I just wanted to say that, if I want to create something, a product, to be shared with others, even if I make it for free and for hobby, I'm obviously interested in it having some success. I and a friend of mine built and manage (as a hobby) a website; of course we decide what goes into it and what doesn't, and of course we're interested in what users want and try to satisfy most of them, still following the guidelines that we chose. It's also a pleasure to feel like you're of some help to others, especially when people appreciate your work. So, you got to find a balance.
If we put into it only what we wanted, that wouldn't be a site, that would be a personal homepage. If phpBB team only followed their own interests, regardless of the community requests, they'd better find a more proficuous way to spend their time. But they don't, as far as I can see.
Of course we may questionate some of their choices; but they simply don't work for us. They're just an indipendent party offering a product and saying, "if you like it, get it, and any suggestion will be welcome; if you don't, find something that fits you better and good luck".

I don't think anybody disagrees with you about this; at least I don't. What I was suggesting was that Eelke's comment shouldn't have been read as if it could, in context, in the first place. To be sure, the phpBB teams and the phpBB websites exist to be helpful to us while serving their own purposes as well. It'd be really hard to imagine how it could be otherwise.

But in the case of something like phpBB (and perhaps unlike your website) we can put that fact soft enough that people stick their foot in the door and say, "Then they should listen more to what we want. If they want to be successful and helpful, they should put in _______ because so many people want it. They're being rather selfish and rude to insist on their own way in this." As we all know, that actually happens. At that point, if they aren't right, what's left to say but something strong?

Not a big deal, just trying to be clear (not that I'm confident I'm succeeding at that).
Nicholas the Italian wrote: (Uhm... topic review here under... weren't messages ordered from newest to oldest once?)

That's what I thought, too.
"I hate trolls!" - Willow Ufgood
User avatar
Highway of Life
Registered User
Posts: 1399
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: I'd love to change the World, but they won't give me the Source Code
Contact:

Re: phpBB 3.2

Post by Highway of Life »

Nicholas, I think to clarify what you are saying...
Yes, phpBB did and still does take a lot of ideas and requests from the community, but the point is that they are making the ultimate decisions as to what goes in, and what does not.
They can’t comply to every single user request... er... demand, in this case.
For example, even your site, you will take requests from users, but you are still the ultimate deciding factor to what it looks like, what goes into the site, and what does not... it’s the same with phpBB.

Sam, just to be clear, I wasn't disagreeing with you, just expounding, elaborating or pointing out some important points. ;) -- and yes, I do agree with what you are saying. :D
SamG wrote:
Nicholas the Italian wrote:(Uhm... topic review here under... weren't messages ordered from newest to oldest once?)
That's what I thought, too.
That has thrown me off quite a bit now as well... I’m not sure I like the change yet... maybe it’s just demo love, but ordering from newest to oldest seems more... natural to me. :?
Image
Post Reply