phpBB 3.2

[Otra]

I thought that I was not rude or anything, but you people sure jumped on my back about it.

They want successful software, and I think they're doing an amazing job and that I really do like phpBB. I said that already, but no one commented on that, did they?

I did not say that I wouldn't use it, so cripes, stop yelling at me. I have read there is already a quick reply mod for v3, and bluntly, I just hate to have to install near perfect software and have to put that one mod in every single time.

I've seen a lot of requests for quick reply while lurking here over time, and honestly, aside from the fact that they don't want to put it in, I have read more then once that they will ban someone for even asking for it. That really annoyed me, but they seem to be better then I thought they were, and they haven't banned me. But then again, I don't feel I was the jerk people are treating me like here, so perhaps they understand.

I do feel they are making this for the public, however. If they weren't, there would only be one phpBB board up, and it would be at phpbb.com.

Please, don't argue with me. That's not what I'm here for. I have an opinion, I voiced it politely, and I am allowed to have an opinion. You are too. Just don't jump on my back about mine, if you disagree, please.

[Nicholas the Italian]

1) What's the need to revive a dead topic?
2) I see four replies to your post, and honestly I find none of them particoularly rude; they just pointed out that we hardly have the right to demand anything for the already mentioned reasons.
3) We all want successful software, and we all like phpBB. This is undisputable.
4) Maybe they ban whoever makes a case and whines all day long for not having QR in phpBB, I don't think they ever banned someone for just asking it.
5) Personally I'd like QR too, and it seems almost as popular as the attachment feature, so I hope they'll put it in someday. Until then, I'll consider installing it as a mod. But we have to respect developers' decisions (also because they are reasoned), and have no right nor power to impose anything to them.

My 1.5 eurocents.

[Eelke]

I do feel they are making this for the public, however. If they weren't, there would only be one phpBB board up, and it would be at phpbb.com.

I feel this has to do with my comment much earlier about who the team is doing this for:

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.

This may seem harsh, but then I do feel strongly about the comment "I could have sworn they're making this for us, and not for them".

I already said that this may be a black reply to a white comment (no qualification is implied by the assignment of which is black and which is white ), and that of course the world is generally a grey place; probably they do not exclusively do it for themselves. The point was, they certainly do not exclusively do it for "us" either, as your comment was implying ("they are making this for us, not for them"). I'm sure the reasons for people to be on the team are many fold; egoboost (I sure as heck would get a big egoboost if I was on the development team for one of the most popular bb packages on the planet, nothing wrong with that, and definitely in the "doing it for us category"), satisfaction to build a good software product, etc. However, at least a big chunk is most likely to be that most (if not all) of the developers have their own websites, and their own boards installed somewhere (sorry to nitpick, but the notion that phpbb.com would be the only phpbb board is just silly - the sites of the various team members would be the only ones, phpbb.com wouldn't even exist).

Anyway, that's not the point. Your comment, to me, seemed like an excuse to make demands and justify telling the development team what to do. At the end of the day, it's simply their project, and they get to choose what they spend their time on. Arguments like "it is the most requested feature" are barely valid, because usually people that are dissatisfied make a lot more noise than people who are satisfied.

[marosell]

highway of life, what is this OpenID system you speak of, and what does it mean for phpbb3?

[Handyman]

well… I'm not Highway of life, but I still can answer that question
OpenID is a world wide web username solution… where you have a userame with them and any site that supports OpenID, instead of registering on that site, you type in your openID username and you are logged in.
The site automatically registers you into their system… but you only need to log in using your openID username and password.

I'll see if I can pull up a demo.
ahh! here: http://openid.phpbb.cc/

When you register with openID, you get a page like this: http://handyman.myopenid.com/

[bonelifer]

QuickReply will always be a MOD. The Dev team has said it in the past, that BB's are discussion boards, not chat boards. They don't like it so they aren't going to include it.

[damnian]

If I may fix just two inaccuracies...

The site automatically registers you into their system… but you only need to log in using your openID username and password.

You log in using your OpenID. Username and password are OpenID provider's implementation detail.

When you register with openID, you get a page like this: http://handyman.myopenid.com/

MyOpenID.com is just one of many OpenID providers out there. You can register with any of them, make your homepage an OpenID, or even run an OpenID server on your own.

[Otra]

Anyway, that's not the point. Your comment, to me, seemed like an excuse to make demands and justify telling the development team what to do. At the end of the day, it's simply their project, and they get to choose what they spend their time on. Arguments like "it is the most requested feature" are barely valid, because usually people that are dissatisfied make a lot more noise than people who are satisfied.

You have a lot of good points there, Eelke. Dissatisfied people are considerably more visible, but let me explain a bit about some things that I didn't say well before.

When I posted my first message (to the one who said "dead topic", sorry, it was the most recent one on the topic I wanted to comment on), I entirely expected to be banned. A good number of months ago, perhaps the middle of last year, I had read that they will ban people from this forum for even requesting the QR Mod to be built in. So I said my peace and figured I'd never be able to say a word about it again.

Telling the development team what to do? That's not what I was trying to do. I found offense that they would (supposedly) say something such as banning anyone who talked about it. This says to me that not only was it requested a lot, but was obviously something that people wanted, and they refused to do it. It's the reasoning that I got from these older posts that offended me.

Jump to now, and I think about it that I never saw anyone from phpBB say anything about that personally, but I saw a few posts from other users here talking about it.

I do feel that they should put it in, but they obviously aren't the kind of people those old posts led me to believe. I quite positively believe that the QR box is one of the best features to have in a forum, especially if a server is going slowly and you don't want to wait for the next screen to pop up. I do believe they are making it for us. phpBB is an amazing system, and to give it away for free is beyond remarkable. The few features missing easily make up for it costing hundreds of dollars less then the pay-for-forum-software, and mods clear that up pretty darned well.

Here's the thing, tho. If they weren't making it for the public, I'd understand them saying "No, we don't want this as a feature." But they are making it for all of us who decide to use it. I consider phpBB *easily* good enough to put above every other free forum software, and well above many (if not all) the pay for forums. Yet I can't understand why they won't put in something that is so wanted. Bluntly, I give in and give my forum's users what they want, if it fits the theme the forum is, and doesn't go against any of our rules.

So, to sum this up: I had believed, by reading older posts here, that they were just thoughtless people who would ban anyone talking about the QR box. It seems I was wrong, or I would have already been banned, and I do apologize to them for that. I also feel that they are making this wonderful software for the public, and if it's within their means, they should put in the features people want. And the important thing, so I don't get more of the "use other software" tirades.. I *love* this software. I've been using it in a very active forum for years. This version has most every feature that I could ever want in a forum, and I do not dislike it. I only dislike the lack of one seemingly desired feature.

[Martin Blank]

If they weren't making it for the public, I'd understand them saying "No, we don't want this as a feature." But they are making it for all of us who decide to use it.

Again, no, they're not. They're making this for themselves, and choose to share it with the public. In some ways, it is like a writer who chooses to publish on a website at her own cost. She writes what she wants to write, and allows the world to see (and maybe use) her words, but she is still writing it for herself, and is under no obligation to make any changes that she doesn't like regardless of what her readers want, no matter how many of them want it or how loudly they may clamor for it.

[Nicholas the Italian]

When I posted my first message (to the one who said "dead topic", sorry, it was the most recent one on the topic I wanted to comment on),

Misunderstood, I just didn't expect such reaction so many days after the replies to your message were posted. Just let go.

If they weren't making it for the public, I'd understand them saying "No, we don't want this as a feature." But they are making it for all of us who decide to use it.

Again, no, they're not. They're making this for themselves, and choose to share it with the public.

This has been discussed elsewhere, and I partially disagree, with all due respect, with Martin. Yes, they've no obligation at all, and we can impose nothing to them (not even to keep up fixing bugs and vulnerabilities), this must be clear, but this doesn't mean they should just disregard suggestions/requests from their users.
The point, to me, is: is really QR such a desired feature? There've been many peoples demanding it; how many? 100? say 1000. Well, how many users does phpBB have (only considering administrators, not final users)? I've no idea, but certainly many more, say 100,000. Of course this doesn't imply that 99,000 admins would oppose the QR feature (especially if they could disable it like they can do with the attachment feature now), but actually we know nothing about what the majority wants. Should we make some kind of poll?
I understand (and support) developers' choice not to bloat up the software with non-fundamental (sure as hell I mispelled this one) features, keeping it simple and letting everyone customize (customise? I don't want to trigger another political/cultural dispute ) their board as much as they want through mods. I also think that largely desired add-ons should be built in the core package to let also medium/low level admins use them without much trouble and need for research (otherwise I don't see why things like attachment feature, advanced permission, friends&foes, and even PMs, are part of the package: many little boards can do well without them).
Now, the questions are:
- what does "largely" mean (not necessarily 50%+1: also 10% can be enough, if the rest is not much bothered by it);
- how can we know how many people actually want what.

I personally hope next versions of phpBB will be truly modular, that is, you first download the very basic package of the software, and then choose which additional components to install, without having to go and look for them and with a one-click install procedure.
At least I'd like to see two separate packages for, say, phpBB 3.2: one basic, for little forums, with few features, and one complete, with more functionalities built in and perfectly integrated and tested by core developers in beta phase (that is quite different from mods).

Hope I made some sense.

So, to sum this up: I had believed, by reading older posts here, that they were just thoughtless people who would ban anyone talking about the QR box. It seems I was wrong, or I would have already been banned, and I do apologize to them for that.

They won't ban you, but for sure Bertiezilla is out to get you, so beware.