[Mageia-dev] PHP + phpBB mod capabilities needed to fix bug 1956 - please help

Wed Jan 11 14:40:33 CET 2012

Am 11.01.2012 10:54, schrieb Wolfgang Bornath:
+> 2012/1/11 Marja van Waes <marja11 at xs4all.nl>:
+>> On 03/01/12 10:09, Wolfgang Bornath wrote:
+>>> 2012/1/3 Michael Scherer<misc at zarb.org>:
+>>>> Le lundi 02 janvier 2012 à 22:17 +0100, Maarten Vanraes a écrit :
+>>>>> Op maandag 02 januari 2012 21:40:31 schreef Michael Scherer:
+>>>>>> Le lundi 02 janvier 2012 à 19:41 +0100, Marja van Waes a écrit :
+>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>> Can someone please help to fix bug 1956?
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>> You don't need to be a regular forum visitor.
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>> We need someone to find and implement a probably existing MOD,  needed
+>>>>>>> to keep forum posts history when unlimited edit time is enabled
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>>  From wobo's comment #32:
+>>>>>>> Capabilities needed:
+>>>>>>> Well, one could say that anybody who
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>>   - knows how to run phpBB as admin and
+>>>>>>>   - has seen a line of php
+>>>>>>>   - knows how to edit code (respecting tags and such)
+>>>>>>>   - knows how to cut&paste
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>> should be able to install an existing MOD (if I'm not mistaken there
+>>>>>>> is
+>>>>>>> one or more).
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>> I know next to nothing about php coding. But I've been running a phpBB
+>>>>>>> forum for a couple of years and successfully implemented some MODs in
+>>>>>>> phpBB2 and phpBB3. With no help (except the phpBB-forum in case of
+>>>>>>> problems).
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>> In practice you have a detailed installation README for each MOD. Like
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>>   - open file /foo/bar/doo.php
+>>>>>>>   - Find the line which starts with '......'
+>>>>>>>   - After that add
+>>>>>>>   - "........."
+>>>>>>>
+>>>>>>> And more such step-by-step guidance
+>>>>>> My eyes start to bleed dues to such "guidances".
+>>>>> i'm sure misc means to say that we should have all our changes in
+>>>>> packages/puppet config so that we can update without issues. and with
+>>>>> file
+>>>>> edits, that's a whole different thing.
+>>>> I was more thinking of proper patchs or better, proper modules, with
+>>>> files to deploy in a well know directory .
+>>> I only gave a part of an example. MODs are made as enhancement to the
+>>> standard software. The easiest MOD is like Michael wrote: "a module
+>>> with files to deploy in a well known directory". But in most cases
+>>> they consist of files to copy into various directories of the program
+>>> tree and changes to existing files of the software. There are other
+>>> MODs which can be implemented automatically - which is far worse IMHO.
+>>> This is where a modded phpBB3 could turn into a nightmare to maintain
+>>> - believe me, I've been there :(
+>>>
+>>> Of course no developper of a MOD could know what somebody has already
+>>> done to the standard files, so it's not possible do use only patches.
+>>> And it could be (and that happens quite often) that a MOD is not
+>>> compatible to your already "modificated" forum software (destroys
+>>> other modifications or whatever).
+>>>
+>>> IMHO the best way in this case here would be a mod written for our
+>>> setup, all changes well defined to make it maintainable in a proper
+>>> way. Saying this I beg to think again whether the issue  justifies all
+>>> the time and work.
+>>>
+>> It would make me very, very happy, does that count a little? If I were sure
+>> that I'd be able to learn how to do it, I would now consider to halve the
+>> time I use for the Bug Squad and Doc Team and start learning.
+> Why? IMHO this complete issue is going out of proportions. Let's
+> remember why we *seem to need* this MOD in the first place. And what
+> will we find? The time-to-edit discussion, again. In the council
+> meeting where it was decided to have this mod It looked as the best
+> way to please a disturbing minority request, the more as that same
+> minority gave the impression that such a MOD could be implemented
+> within a reasonable time span. As we see now after 8 months, this was
+> never the case.
+>
+> Adding the fact that a test period of several months with a much
+> looser time-to-edit setting in the German Mageia forum showed not one
+> single case of misuse brings me to the conviction that we should
+> rather rethink the time-to-edit limitation itself than to waste
+> manpower on this issue. Manpower which is needed at more important
+> tasks, if I may say.
+>
+In general i don't like those +1 posts, but this ^^ one hits the nail on the head.
++1
+