Development Discussion Board

Think we probably can just add a requirement of shortened names for MODs.
Thus MOD will have a regular, not restricted by characters and/or length, descriptive name and a shortened one that should be used to name folders and classes the MOD creates.

My concern here is what do we actually define as <modname>. Here are some examples of MODs names (no idea if they could use classes, just f.e.): Multiple File Upload(addon for UserBlogMod) Living Avatars Member Control Panel Integration Security Blanket Spam Blocker by Area-51-X.com Having folders l...

The patch doesn't respect fix for XSS in flash bbcode as well as classes autoloading feature, it should be fixed.
Didn't look deeper yet.

OK, we shouldn't provide filename, attachment id and link to files, and no delete option for files in PMs then. So the rest of things is posting info (date/author), and something instead of filename. Noxwizard suggested physical filename in IRC today. We could provide just a file type instead of it ...

Currently (in phpBB 3.0.x) every user has a full list of own attachments in UCP (those are files in posts and PMs) and can delete files, while administrator can't control attachments list at all. I suggest to leave administrator control over all files including files in PMs because that's a kind of ...

Noxwizard wrote:These links already appear in their posts, which are visible to crawlers.

Well, "general linking (within posts) to other sites is generally not permitted" as per our rule 5c (and rule 6a is related to this policy as well)

We even don't have profiles publicly open neither on phpbb.com nor on area51 :) And when we're talking about hiding it from bots this affects only registered bots, so profiles will be crawled by search engines anyway. If the information is visible to registered users, the information is essentially ...

To be honest, search -> entering the user is much faster way, because to make it via profile you have to find a link to profile, which requires to utilize users search first (unless the user you need is online luckily). So my opinion is that opening profiles to guests is useless in regard of user's ...

nn- wrote:I run 5.1.

Same here.

I'm not sure about what option to choose because while I haven't objections about opening new development channel I'm still thinking we should keep the private one for some sorts of inner-team discussions (security issues for example). So if we just open new channel while having private one I'm for ...