[RFC|Rejected] Removal of subsilver2

These RFCs were either rejected or have been replaced by an alternative proposal. They will not be included in phpBB.
Locked
User avatar
Ger
Registered User
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 1:55 pm
Location: 192.168.1.100
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by Ger » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:49 am

Rotsblok wrote:Don't know if it's a major problem to write...
Shouldn't be much of a problem for ProSilver with the mentioned style specific configuration mentioned by ToonArmy, but I think it's much harder voor subSilver2.
Above message may contain errors in grammar, spelling or wrongly chosen words. This is because I'm not a native speaker. My apologies in advance.

Oleg
Posts: 1150
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:38 am
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by Oleg » Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:15 am

A point that I believe was not mentioned is that subsilver requires support from the code to do certain things, for example attachment uploading popups. If subsilver support is removed from the official tree and these code bits are subsequently removed as 'unnecessary' (since prosilver does not use them) whoever is a subsilver maintainer, assuming there would be such a person, would have to maintain code changes from official tree in order for subsilver style to function the way it does now. Similarly, users installing the subsilver 'style' would be required to edit php code for it to work.

ToonArmy
Registered User
Posts: 335
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:31 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by ToonArmy » Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:25 am

nn- wrote:A point that I believe was not mentioned is that subsilver requires support from the code to do certain things, for example attachment uploading popups. If subsilver support is removed from the official tree and these code bits are subsequently removed as 'unnecessary' (since prosilver does not use them) whoever is a subsilver maintainer, assuming there would be such a person, would have to maintain code changes from official tree in order for subsilver style to function the way it does now. Similarly, users installing the subsilver 'style' would be required to edit php code for it to work.
Well that's easily solved, just don't remove them. I don't see why would would anyway in case people have made use of them in non-subviler2 based styles.
Chris SmithBlogXMOOhlohArea51WikiNo support via PM/IM
Image

User avatar
naderman
Consultant
Posts: 1727
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 2:11 am
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by naderman » Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:47 pm

So can I assume that those who spoke out against removing subsilver2 can live with this alternative proposed solution?

Creaky
Registered User
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:16 am

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by Creaky » Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:37 pm

I'm fine with leaving it in the package, just because it's there doesn't mean I have to use it.

marian0810
Former Team Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:31 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by marian0810 » Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:33 pm

naderman wrote:So can I assume that those who spoke out against removing subsilver2 can live with this alternative proposed solution?
I can definitely live with it, especially if the issues with prosilver will be solved :)
Don' t Cry Because It's Over
Smile Because It Happened

Phil
Registered User
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:20 am
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by Phil » Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:14 pm

If you are referring to rxu's solution, yes, that is acceptable.
My phpbb.com account
Note that any of my opinions expressed in RFC topics are my own and not necessarily representative of the opinion of the phpBB Team.

FeyFre
Registered User
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by FeyFre » Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:05 pm

naderman wrote:So can I assume that those who spoke out against removing subsilver2 can live with this alternative proposed solution?
Which one?

Never mind. The answer will probably NO.

Marshalrusty
Project Manager
Project Manager
Posts: 272
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:45 am

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by Marshalrusty » Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:34 pm

FeyFre wrote:Never mind. The answer will probably NO.
Wait, did you just disagree without bothering to figure out what you disagreed with?

User avatar
naderman
Consultant
Posts: 1727
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 2:11 am
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
Contact:

Re: [RFC|Accepted] Removal of subsilver2

Post by naderman » Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:44 pm

FeyFre wrote:
naderman wrote:So can I assume that those who spoke out against removing subsilver2 can live with this alternative proposed solution?
Which one?
This one:
rxu wrote:
Marshalrusty wrote:I am still against the idea of dropping support for a style that is used by a large portion of the community. Part of the idea of 3.1 (as opposed to 4.0) is that a large portion of backwards compatibility is maintained.
In this case we can do the following. Keep the decision of dropping subsilver2 from phpBB package but continue maintaining of subsilver2 to be up to date with 3.1 latest code. That means official support won't be dropped and subsilver2 code changes will be provided for 3.1.x releases.
The benefits of this variant I see:
  • We keep only prosilver in phpBB package, further development will be kept for this style only;
  • By leaving only prosilver in phpBB package we increase using of it for new installations;
  • We keep official support and updates for userbase using subsilver2 and leave them satisfied;
  • With the points above we provide preparation for users to smooth migration to the future phpBB 4.0.
  • etc.
ToonArmy wrote:
naderman wrote:I very much favour this option as well. But the question is how do we want to keep maintaining it? If we want to guarantee proper support we need to keep it in the repository. We can then still exclude it from the standard distribution at release time. As for the updater, yes we should definately find a solution that is acceptable for subsilver2 users.
Agreed, this is a much more graceful way of deprecating the style. We can restore subsilver2 to its original location in the repository and remove it from the final downloads in the packaging script. The updater packages should continue to include it but they'll only update styles if they exist on the filesystem (if this doesn't happen already.) To provide a visual cue to the user about the status of subsilver2 the style.cfg syntax can be extended to add an optional message element that'll be presented to the admin in the styles management interface. This will warn those running phpBB from a git checkout, it'll also serve as a secondary reminder to anyone downloading from the styles DB.
FeyFre wrote:Never mind. The answer will probably NO.
Seriously? You can't even be bothered to read the posts in this forum? You don't know what the question is but your answer is "NO"? If you don't want to participate in forming compromises just go elsewhere, this community really doesn't need people who make statements like that.

Locked