Lisa
Well-known member
I think Biker is thinking along the lines of vb.org which, if memory served originally was not owned by vBulletin but was a sister-site of a sort.You say it is still run by XF, doesn't that mean they are still responsible?
Should XF take a more active role in add-on 'retirement'?
- Thread starter Mouth
- Start date
Mouth
Well-known member
I think you're too hung-up on the notion of responsibility perhaps?
Just because you care about something, putting in (semi)automated methods and policies, doesn't make you responsible.
Auto archiving with a defined criteria, a defined policy on action/investigation due to n reports of malicious/poor performance or inadequate support, etc.
Biker
Well-known member
Originally, that was true. But they were absorbed by Jelsoft years ago. Now it's owned by Internet Brands. But it's still considered a separate entity from vbulletin.com.
Lisa
Well-known member
Yep, that's why I said "originally"
Mouth
Well-known member
Visit vb.org and it says at the very top ... "The Official vBulletin Modifications Site", and at the very bottom ... "Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Design by Princeton Copyright ©2001 - 2013, vbulletin.org. All rights reserved."
I don't think anyone considers that a separate entity.
Biker
Well-known member
Your post implies that you DO think XF should be responsible. You want them to investigate addons that perform poorly. You want them to implement policies that auto archive addons that may not need archiving. If that doesn't put the responsibility for Quality Control on XF, what are you really trying to say?
Biker
Well-known member
Go ask on vbulletin.com about an addon. Guess what your answer will be?
Lisa
Well-known member
I'll have to argue this one. It's always been a well-known fact amongst vB users that vb.org is a separate entity in its own right.
Onimua
Well-known member
It's not much different from here, except instead of going to a different site you're asked to post in the respective thread.
Biker
Well-known member
There's a HUGE difference. vb.org and vb.com are two totally different sites.
Sheldon
Well-known member
I think he said that. The only difference is instead of at another site posting in each thread, you are in a subforum here posting in each thread.
Onimua
Well-known member
I'm fully aware of that. My point was that here, you don't have to go back and forth between two different sites and have two different accounts for each of them, and everything is very manageable here for the most part for both developers and customers.
Mouth
Well-known member
Well-known facts, and accurate facts, are rarely the same
Both sites are owned by the exact same company, and they make no illusions to insinuate otherwise - in fact, quite the opposite.No thanks, my iMac would have a friggin mental melt-down waiting for that site to load.
Lisa
Well-known member
Well-known facts, and accurate facts, are rarely the same
Moving out of the discussion this thread is about really, but being owned by the same company doesn't mean that they're the same entity
Mouth
Well-known member
More importantly, who gives a toss what vb.{org|com} do. XF left that stable a long time ago, and I'm sure doesn't want to be dragged back down to it's sub-level and way of thinking. XF came about because the future and expectation of forums was not what vB was offerring. Why take a step back and measure XF by what vB does? Seriosuly, some of you need to be biatch slapped with a wet fish! 
Now, more than ever, is time to look at the big picture and the emerging and current eco for social engagement? Look at the big players - apple, google, amazon, facebook, and a whole lot more small/middle players too - they are all taking care and interest in what add-ons do to their products and what shapes the impression and performance of their product and brand. Why move back to the dark ages and want to model your behaviour on what some crusty old dying cranky software is doing and behaving? Your cannot soar like an eagle when you hang-out with, or copy, turkeys!!!!
Now, more than ever, is time to look at the big picture and the emerging and current eco for social engagement? Look at the big players - apple, google, amazon, facebook, and a whole lot more small/middle players too - they are all taking care and interest in what add-ons do to their products and what shapes the impression and performance of their product and brand. Why move back to the dark ages and want to model your behaviour on what some crusty old dying cranky software is doing and behaving? Your cannot soar like an eagle when you hang-out with, or copy, turkeys!!!!
Digital Jedi
Well-known member
That would be an indicator if every person who ever bought xF posted in the pre-sales forum. Which is unlikely. Naturally, people who want add-ons would ask about add-ons. That's not an indicator of how many people didn't want add-ons, and didn't have a question that was already answered elsewhere.
Morgain
Well-known member
Good point Digital. But it still means there's a LOT of interest in XF addons.
Addons is one of the major selling points of XF - it's designed to be good for addons so it's an addon type of setup.
As for a separate site like vb.org NO a thousand times NO.
Ask a question in that system and each site says it's a problem for the other. I remember.
Ask a question HERE and chances are the mods know whether it's a core issue or an addon and can help on either. Same with the many other helpers here.
XF was genius integrating the addons here.
We just need an automated system to tag addons as "unattended" - that would be better than "unsupported"
Addons is one of the major selling points of XF - it's designed to be good for addons so it's an addon type of setup.
As for a separate site like vb.org NO a thousand times NO.
Ask a question in that system and each site says it's a problem for the other. I remember.
Ask a question HERE and chances are the mods know whether it's a core issue or an addon and can help on either. Same with the many other helpers here.
XF was genius integrating the addons here.
We just need an automated system to tag addons as "unattended" - that would be better than "unsupported"
Shelley
Well-known member
The xenmoods add-on is a perfect example of an add-on that hasn't been updated for over a year, infact, it doesn't have to be because it just works and works flawlessly. What I get from this thread is "we want more bloat so continue developing just to show your actively working on add-on (x)" .
I agree 100% with morgain, separate site I think would be a big mistake. Xenforo made a good choice keeping everything within one roof housing all of it's content and the benefits are shown and like Morgain stated your not passed onto site a only to be passed back to site b.
I agree 100% with morgain, separate site I think would be a big mistake. Xenforo made a good choice keeping everything within one roof housing all of it's content and the benefits are shown and like Morgain stated your not passed onto site a only to be passed back to site b.
Why is it so bad that xF does a little bit of QA and active involvement in the RM? Again, they are providing this service for free for any author, and setting some rules to follow is not a bad idea. Just to slap on some warnings on addons based on certain criterias, like xF version they are released for, author's last login date etc. And as SchmitzIT pointed out, xF is now in the unique possision where it hasn't been much changes over the last year, so allot of old resources are still working, however this does not have to be true going forward.
I also agree with Mike, that a certain level of professionalism has to be expected when submitting resources, especially paid ones.
I also agree with Mike, that a certain level of professionalism has to be expected when submitting resources, especially paid ones.
Sheldon
Well-known member
What is the outline of "certain level of professionalism"? Curious...
