clone_post out of the box

[globetrotting]

I already asked and argued to have a clone_post function as an extension here.
But considering that a post is the one basic element the whole board is made of, cloning a post in order to modify and then merge or open a new topic with that clone should imho be a standard, inbuilt function in phpBB.

As written in the above link:

... If we need to clone a post, which happens several times daily, we are now forced to clone a whole topic of several pages into a hidden forum. Then we have to delete all it's posts except one to finally have a clone of the desired post. Which then has to be moved to it's final destination.

Some posts also need to be tripled or even quadrupled - imagine the waste of time and the potential of mismanagement!

I'll post this same topic also in the area51 phpBB 3.x discussion, but fearing that it might be too late to be integrated there, I wanted to make sure that this request is being heard for phpBB 4.

Thank you

[DavidIQ]

Doesn't sound like a feature that needs to be in the core. For phpBB 2.0 and, later on, 3.0 someone created a MOD since it was a niche type of feature that relatively few admins needed.

[3Di]

@globetrotting

Certainly a non-essential niche option, I hardly find it normal to do what you want to do, let alone the reason for it. Anyway the topic has been widely discussed I think in the topic you linked, as an alternative I find that the only possible option is to ask for an extension created specifically for your needs, as I otherwise already said. You can request it for a fee if nothing else, there is a forum created especially for this.

[Deactivated 140246]

Why would this need to be in the core? Also, why not just have an Administrator use the edit function, copying the post's content, and then reposting the content in a new post?

[warmweer]

Why would this need to be in the core? Also, why not just have an Administrator use the edit function, copying the post's content, and then reposting the content in a new post?

Because that new post would need
a) changing the true poster_id (in this case an Administrator) to the source poster's id
b) changing the post_time to the post_time of the source post.
The second part can be done (approximately) with javiexin's Change PostTime extension but that will set the post_time to the precise second of the original timestamp, not to the timestamp itself. The latter currently requires database editing, and I'm not even sure whether a timestamp double is accepted (which is why by default I add 1 unit to the timestamp).

It's a feature I use regularly but don't consider necessary as a default feature. On the other hand, I don't consider cloning a topic important enough for it to be a default feature either

[3Di]

a) changing the true poster_id (in this case an Administrator) to the source poster's id

That is a built in Moderator function - MCP change poster.

b) changing the post_time to the post_time of the source post.
The second part can be done (approximately) with javiexin's Change PostTime extension but that will set the post_time to the precise second of the original timestamp, not to the timestamp itself. The latter currently requires database editing, and I'm not even sure whether a timestamp double is accepted (which is why by default I add 1 unit to the timestamp).

A doubled timestamp is accepted.
In this case is the post's ID that rules it all.

[warmweer]

a) changing the true poster_id (in this case an Administrator) to the source poster's id

That is a built in Moderator function - MCP change poster.

Of course I know that (and you know that I know that).
The point is that extra actions have to be performed to create a clone of a post, some with native phpBB tools (a bit inefficient time- and action-wise), or some with manual database editing (not recommended).
The topic cloning is a default feature and can be used to create a clone_post but also requires extra actions.
As I mentioned, I need the feature (post-cloning) but don't consider post-cloning (nor topic-cloning) as an essential feature for phpBB.
However, since topic-cloning is there already, I'm assuming that adding a post-cloning option wouldn't need a major coding effort (it's an assumption so I could be wrong)

To cut this short, I'm not asking for this, but it seems to be a wanted feature (although probably only for a minority) so while phpBB4 is still being developed, now's the time for the developers to investigate whether this feature would be an "easy/feasible" addition or not.

[3Di]

(and you know that I know that)

Wrong.

[warmweer]

(and you know that I know that)

Wrong.

https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtop ... #p15378191

[*]Change the poster using the built in phpBB feature

I'll grant you that there no way anyone can read everything but that wasn't the first time the subject was discussed and both of us participated in this discussion.

Anyway, I assumed you would have known that I know and have used the change poster feature regularly, my fault.
The point is that I and other users have made a case for including a clone post feature. The pro's have been discussed, but the only con I've read is that it's not worth it since it can be done in another ("native") way. While the statement as such is true, it's not a very strong argument and could actually be used to halt a lot of development.
Granted, the seemingly lack of interest in the feature isn't exactly an enticement for much investigation into the matter, but I for one would like to know whether it is possible to include this without a major restructuring (or rewrite).

[3Di]

There is already an idea where you posted and your opinion it was quite the same of us
https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtop ... #p15658881

This has been discussed already.
Clone Post (Not: topic)
While I do consider it a useful feature, it's truly a niche feature and a simple text copy or a quote can achieve the result mentioned in the title (copy vs. clone).
I would give the idea a YES vote, if it weren't for the too short description you posted which doesn't generate any interest (+ threads <> topics ).
As david63 mentioned: a user case would greatly help in explaining the need for such a feature.

If that's not enough there is the tracker, where a new feature request can be made (for phpBB4).