Implemented Image and Media gallery must be INTEGRATED

[Tigratrus]

Image and video gallery that is actually INTEGRATED with the forums. ALL images and video that has been uploaded should categorizable, searchable and should be EASILY organized and reused by the member. Take a look at http://www.plupload.com/ for an upload system that resizes the image ON THE WORKSTATION. This is huge, as most people don't have a clue how to resize an image and get frustrated when their 5 MB image takes forever to upload.

 

[Forsaken]

ps.. can I pre-order the xenforo ice-cream maker add-on v1.0.0 please!

I just made ice cream in an ice cream maker!

 

[Kim]

mmmm what kind???

 

[Forsaken]

mmmm what kind???

Probably a weird one for most people; Plum tea with some candied plums in it.

 

[Kim]

sounds really interesting, green tea ice cream is nice.

 

[Brandon_R]

This might also lead to a false impression of growth as a higher version number usually means more man hours etc.

 

[Forsaken]

sounds really interesting, green tea ice cream is nice.

Matters on where you get it; sometimes its a bit to bland, sometimes theres to little balance between the cream of the flavor .

http://www.fosselmans.com/ do a lot of very good ice creams (They're about 40 minutes from where I live).

 

[Kim]

What a great looking store! You are fortunate to have one close by, we have only commercial ordinary rubbish around here Where we used to live was close to one of the best Italian Gelatoria .. OH MY!!! soooo good!

 

[Forsaken]

Oh... Theres a lot of gelato and other places around me as well.

I usually prefer to make my own ice cream and such, because it'll usually taste better, but I'll buy it if I need bulk (Cept for this one gelato place that has about 40 flavors, and they're balanced perfectly).

 

[Kim]

I must invest in an ice-cream maker

 

[Shamil]

Personally, I disagree. It can get confusing. What if we go up a minor version of forum software, and no changes whatsoever are attributed? Each change would need to be synchronised, and things could get done slowly.

 

[Jethro]

This might also lead to a false impression of growth as a higher version number usually means more man hours etc.

Brandon ran into a version number problem over the weekend, okay it was the main forum product plus eight additional modules all with differing version numbers. It took quite a while to ensure everything would marry up, and then managed to completely miss one module as it was sitting on a first release number, ie no one had thought to mention it worked with the latest version of the forum product. And yes all official products, it really is a shambles.

 

[MordyT]

Personally, I disagree. It can get confusing. What if we go up a minor version of forum software, and no changes whatsoever are attributed? Each change would need to be synchronised, and things could get done slowly.

Hence why I said...

Lets say..

Forum: V 3.2 (been a couple years)
Blog: (first version ever) V 3.2.1 (alothough its a new item, it grabs the first two numbers, then adds its version number...)
Then an update to the blog comes along... Blog: V 3.2.2

Then a month later, forum gets updated to V 3.3
The blog get updated (if needed) and rebranded Blog: V 3.3.1

The idea is that as long as the first two numbers match they should work. Then the forum gets two patches to V 3.3.3 The blog does not need anything, so it stays at V 3.3.1. But since the 3.3 is the same prefix in both, they are compatible.

 

[darkon]

This is more confusing than different versionnumbers.

 

[Forsaken]

Yeah... I don't think this working well.

I would much prefer to keep version #'s separate, and just add a list of versions the add-on supports? 

 

[Sejper]

So much better to do the version # right and not jump over numbers.

 

[Shamil]

Hence why I said...

Lets say..

Forum: V 3.2 (been a couple years)
Blog: (first version ever) V 3.2.1 (alothough its a new item, it grabs the first two numbers, then adds its version number...)
Then an update to the blog comes along... Blog: V 3.2.2

Then a month later, forum gets updated to V 3.3
The blog get updated (if needed) and rebranded Blog: V 3.3.1

The idea is that as long as the first two numbers match they should work. Then the forum gets two patches to V 3.3.3 The blog does not need anything, so it stays at V 3.3.1. But since the 3.3 is the same prefix in both, they are compatible.

And what happens when forum gets to 3.2.1? It's just going to cause confusion.

 

[Kim]

I think the point is that it is confusing now The suggested solution might not be the one, but surely we can have a discussion about it and try to ascertain a better system than is currently being used.

perhaps the inclusion of a letter or symbol indicating this version is for the latest version.. I don't know the answer, but let's toss it around a bit see if we *can* come up with soemthing better

 

[Onimua]

Hence why I said...

Lets say..

Forum: V 3.2 (been a couple years)
Blog: (first version ever) V 3.2.1 (alothough its a new item, it grabs the first two numbers, then adds its version number...)
Then an update to the blog comes along... Blog: V 3.2.2

Then a month later, forum gets updated to V 3.3
The blog get updated (if needed) and rebranded Blog: V 3.3.1

The idea is that as long as the first two numbers match they should work. Then the forum gets two patches to V 3.3.3 The blog does not need anything, so it stays at V 3.3.1. But since the 3.3 is the same prefix in both, they are compatible.

That doesn't handle other products well.

v3.2.1.4.3 for the Forum/Blog/Gallery/Calendar? That just really over complicates what a otherwise a simple version means, and people who run forum software generally know what version numbers mean since it's common practice of "major version . semi-major version . minor fixes" across a lot of applications. What happens when you start to include third-party add-ons and their version numbers?

Keeping the version numbers separate and having them represent what they really are works fine. Someone understands:

Installed Forum Version: 2.0.1 | Latest Stable Version: 2.0.2
Installed Blog Version: 1.0.0 | Latest Stable Version: 1.0.0

If you label it and present it in a decent fashion, people shouldn't get confused and if they are, other things will probably confuse them as well.

 

[Kim]

I for one am not easily confused, however having board at (say) 4.2.7 and Blogs at 3.1.5 and Gallery at 4.1.0 and Subscriptions at 1.1.0 and Download Manager at 3.5.8 -etc etc etc IS confusing. There is ZERO denotation of what goes with what in that kind of set up.

Please don't belittle people for wanting to explore a better system, it doesn't make them stupid, or easily confused, in fact the opposite it makes them seekers of a better way

 

[MrBlubke]

I'd say keep the build numbers separated, but add a possibility to set a minimum build in the add-ons so that an add-on can tell a user that the xenforo build does/does not meet the add-ons minimal requirement...