MODS -> plugins/add-ons/extensions

[ToonArmy]

I think the Firefox terms work well, add ons encompassing extensions and themes.

I have always been just as disgusted with their schitzo naming conventions as with all the others that use multiple terms when one would suffice. Do not forget firefox plugins, which are *slightly* different from extensions...

Plugins help your browser perform specific functions like viewing special graphic formats or playing multimedia files. Plugins are slightly different from extensions, which modify or add to existing functionality.

When I have family and friends that call me regularly to ask what they should be looking for, a plugin or extension and why are they called addons if they are extensions....OMFG I could kill projects for overcomplicating terminology instead of folllowing KISS.

Plugins yeah it does get a little silly. However there should be a differentiation between styles and extensions as they are inherently different but could be packaged and distributed in the same way.

[EXreaction]

We've been using the term customisation for the next Mod/Style DB.

[code reader]

I think the Firefox terms work well, add ons encompassing extensions and themes.

I have always been just as disgusted with their schitzo naming conventions as with all the others that use multiple terms when one would suffice. Do not forget firefox plugins, which are *slightly* different from extensions...

Plugins help your browser perform specific functions like viewing special graphic formats or playing multimedia files. Plugins are slightly different from extensions, which modify or add to existing functionality.

When I have family and friends that call me regularly to ask what they should be looking for, a plugin or extension and why are they called addons if they are extensions....OMFG I could kill projects for overcomplicating terminology instead of folllowing KISS.

let me be the advocate for what you hate, maybe we can find at least *some* logic behind it.
there is a real distinction between an extension that is written entirely with php-html-javascript, and an extension that needs external executables/binaries.
there is a slightly more subtle distinction where an extension requires an optional php library.

as an example to the first are practically all the current phpbb MODs, styles and translations (i know, php MODs operate differrently that what we talk about here, but this is irrelevant to the point i am trying to make here)
the only example i can think of for the 2nd variety is the sphynx search "plugin" in use at phpbb.com (and maybe elsewhere)
as an example to the 3rd i can think of some of the captcha plugins that require graphic libraries that may or may not be installed (i think something similar also exist for some of the "gallery/albums" that need the external library to generate thumbnails).

the distinction is meaningful because the first kind is completely agnostic to the server architecture and OS: this is handles completely by the PHP engine, and all we care about is: "is PHP of appropriate version"?

however, if you want to use, say, the sphynx search engine, you should now know what OS and architecture are we running on in order to be able to even check if the required external bins that are required are installed.

i think that the distinction firefox is doing comes from this.
ttbomk, "normal" firefox add-ons will install and work on firefox regardless of whether it's Mac (intel), Mac (powerpc), Windoze, Linux, BSD or any other platform firefox is running on. they only require that the firefox version will be within the range of supported versions for this add-an.
"Plugins", however, very much depends on the underlying OS and hardware: the PDF viewer plugin for Linux X86 32 bit will not work (or even install) on Linux x86 64 bit, never mind other OS or architecture.

so, maybe this distinction is a bit confusing, but it is not arbitrary.
i could argue for similar distinction wrt phpbb.

peace.

[bolverk]

Let me redirect eveyone's attention back to the sole reason for this topic,

Fwiw, I think the term "MODS" needs to be left behind with the 3.x branch and the terminology used in version 4 should accurately reflect the nature of how the code will work.

Based on nadermans's wiki entry which I quoted in my first post, the 1 <- one and only one goal of this topic was to define the term used to replace what are currently known as MOD's. Styles are not currently known as MOD's so there is no reason to rename them in Rhea, at least no reason I can see at the present time. Currently MOD's are simply known as MOD's, there are not multiple terms or levels of distinction within MOD's today therefore the replacement should be a 1:1 relationship, just as it is today. There seemed to be a majority that any term that contained "mod" should be out for a variety of legitimate reasons so we are left with the following:

plugins

add-ons

extensions

Since the term Styles is not under discussion here there is no need to look for some sort of *umbrella* term that would cover both extended features <-formerly known as MOD's & Styles together, therefore add-ons really doesn't seem to fit IMO.

[jwxie]

Is this a trivial thing? Both Yes and NO.
I mean just let's agree on 2 things.

1. We DO need to have one name for a particular category.
2. This name should correspond to the vision of phpBB 4.0

Do we have an agreement with the architecture of phpBB 4 yet? Somehow yes, both lightweight but powerful enough to build around with another application (powerful API and integration). Elegant, huh?

Is it hook, like those in wordpress? Is it the old vision that users should edit phpBB3 files to add new features?

We have plugins, add-ons, extensions, modifications, and hacks. LOL
Both hook and editing will be there. I personally think modification is the right words. Plugins sounds like you plugin something in - that's hook. Add-ons sounds like both (don't use Firefox as an example, please). Extensions sounds like an API stuff to me. Hacks? That just sounds wrong LOL and last, modifications? We have use it for so long and we short-named it MODS. This is good. Why should we invent another new words when the name only suggest one thing: is it comprehensive!???

[bolverk]

And again for those who do not apparently read well....

There seemed to be a majority that any term that contained "mod" should be out for a variety of legitimate reasons so we are left with the following:

Translation: MOD anything is out, hacks was never even a consideration.

[jwxie]

So is mod an unacceptable term already?

I don't see any valid reason why Mods isn't a good term.

Like I said, naming is for two things: (1) comprehensiveness and (2) correspond to phpBB4's vision
Unless you really want to separate two things: editing and plain HOOK (with no editing involve at all)
Then we should just make it hook and modification

If we want to invent a new term because phpBB4 is a new release, I don't see it as a reason - that's just navie.

[code reader]

So is mod an unacceptable term already?

IMO - yes.

I don't see any valid reason why Mods isn't a good term.

i do. mainly historical reason: the term MOD, in the context of phpbb have acquired a specific meaning, which will not apply to phpbb4 plugins.
using the same word for two different things is usually not a good idea, especially when talking about something new: this is just a call for confusion.

Unless you really want to separate two things: editing and plain HOOK (with no editing involve at all)

there should be NO editing involved.
any modification that actually requires the user to modify the kernel whould be called "Hack" and should be very strongly discouraged, and no built-in tooling should support it, i.e., nothing with similar functionality to the current "upgrader" should be included.

peace.

[Gioweb]

For inspiration, we can look at other projects.

Wordpress -> Plugins
Drupal -> Modules
Joomla -> "Extensions", which falls apart into "Components", "plugins" *and* "modules", depending on the mechanism used by the extension (and its purpose).

I think that the management of software updates, plugins, and the widgets in wordpress is simply spectacular.
If it were so phpbb4, it would be nice!

[code reader]

I think that the management of software updates, plugins, and the widgets in wordpress is simply spectacular.
If it were so phpbb4, it would be nice!

-- this discussion is (mainly) not about the nature of the extension mechanism, to be used, but about the *terminology* (i.e. "how should we call it") to be used with phpbb4.
-- this said, if you want to promote the use of mechanism *like* wordpress, it would help much more to try and describe in greater detail how the wordpress mechanism work (but please find a more appropriate topic - and if you can't find one, open a new one).

thanks.