[RFC|Rejected] Removal of subsilver2

[Ger]

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.

[Oleg]

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]

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.

[naderman]

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

[Creaky]

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

[marian0810]

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

[Phil]

If you are referring to rxu's solution, yes, that is acceptable.

[FeyFre]

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]

Never mind. The answer will probably NO.

Wait, did you just disagree without bothering to figure out what you disagreed with?

[naderman]

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

Which one?

This one:

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.

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.

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.