XF 3 General Information & Discussion

[nocte]

(Sometimes feel like we can’t win )

Yeah, every forum owner knows that: If you change something "everything used to be better before". If you don't make changes people go to more modern platforms or simply complain about missing features.

I just wonder why some XF customers - forum owner themselves - don't understand, that they act like their own users often do..

 

[Paul B]

Way too soon... not even on 2.3 yet waiting for addons. I can just imagine those developers facepalming.

XF 2.3 Beta 1 was released 19 March, almost 6 months ago.

If developers haven't released compatible updates by now then that's a them problem.

Do you seriously expect development on XF to cease until all third party add-ons are updated?

 

[Mr Lucky]

Do you seriously expect development on XF to cease until all third party add-ons are updated?

No, but then that isn't what I said. Can you imagine the work involved for someone who develops close on 200 complex addons? (especially when starting the process at beta 1 as opposed to a close to final release could just make the whole process more and more complex.)

 

[Abraham54]

Can I assume that XenForo 3.0 now will be based on the coming XenForo 2.4?

 

[Paul B]

Can you imagine the work involved for someone who develops close on 200 complete addons?

Perhaps one person shouldn't have 200 add-ons.

It's unsustainable.

No, but then that isn't what I said.

It is though.
You said "let the dust settle" which means to slow down/stop development so add-on developers can catch up.

 

[Paul B]

Can I assume that XenForo 3.0 now will be based on the coming XenForo 2.4?

No.

Read the announcement - XF 3 and XF 2.3 are being developed simultaneously and independently.

All features in the 2 branch will be carried over to the 3 branch.

 

[Suzanne O]

So much to look forward to!

Can you please make sure that the ignore button gets a block button as a buddy so that some people don't look at disabling it.

 

[Forsaken]

No, but then that isn't what I said. Can you imagine the work involved for someone who develops close on 200 complex addons? (especially when starting the process at beta 1 as opposed to a close to final release could just make the whole process more and more complex.)

2.4 sounds more like a normal major update, rather than 2.3 which was outside the norm for how it broke compatibility.

If it is mostly QoL and features, it is unlikely to break add-ons, other than possibly replacing add-ons.

As far as I am aware, the only add-ons that haven't completely been updated are @Ozzy47, as he is currently MIA (I believe Painbaker has updated a lot of them, just needs Ozzy to release them), or people who are not active.

 

[javakhir]

I have 134 addons, 100 of them work with XF 2.3.3

 

[Mr Lucky]

. I can just imagine those developers facepalming.

I don’t think you’ve fully read the thread, particularly about focusing on backwards compatibility.
Maybe we didn’t emphasise that enough.

To be fair, minimising backwards compatibility wasn't emphasised and it's something that I would have thought should be a given, and not the same as focussing on it which was only mentioned after I posted the above. I had 100% read the thread just not those that hadn't yet been posted

Don't get me wrong I applaud the team for addressing the customer suggestions, but was frustrated by 2.3. I followed all the betas, took time to do quite extensive testing and bug reporting, helped a lot of users here with answering queries. Finally I was ready to upgrade my main forum along with big new style improvements I'd been promising, only to find it will most likely be months before the addons attach up.

It's great that there is now a focus on backwards compatibility but I do sympathise with those developers still struggling on a lot of work that is basically unpaid - because being compatible doesn't necessarily translate into new sales, and being temporarily incompatible does translate into loss of current sales. If I was developing addons right now I can believe there's a good chance I'd down tools, go on a nice well earned holiday and wait for 2.4 just in case there was another rewrite necessary. It may be a bit disingenuous to call it a them problem which was mentioned earlier.

It has been suggested before, but perhaps there is a good case now for more collaboration with the main addon developers prior to new version releases giving them a lot more info on how changes would or wouldn't be likely to have an impact on coding.

 

[Mr Lucky]

No, but then that isn't what I said. Can you imagine the work involved for someone who develops close on 200 complex addons? (especially when starting the process at beta 1 as opposed to a close to final release could just make the whole process more and more complex.)

As far as I am aware, the only add-ons that haven't completely been updated are @Ozzy47,

Not to mention Xon

Both highly regarded and prolific developers that seem to be quite well featured in those threads we see asking about must have addons.

 

[FTL]

Perhaps one person shouldn't have 200 add-ons.

It's unsustainable

@AndyB has over 485! I don't know how he does it, the guy's superman. The ones I use all work properly, too. Just don't install a 2.3 only add-on on 2.2 like I did by mistake a while back. It doesn't end well.

 

[Chris D]

The ones I use all work properly, too.

Just don't install a 2.3 only add-on on 2.2 like I did a while back. It doesn't end well.

If the add-on worked properly, it would be marked to require a minimum XF version so that this kind of thing isn't possible.

 

[FTL]

I did it on the back of AndyB's version checker add-on, which did state 2.3 only and so did its product page, but I didn't notice it (I hadn't looked at the product page, just upgraded the one I had via the version checker add-on). Perhaps the add-on installer should have detected that it was running on 2.2 and refused to install which would be an improvement? AndyB's more qualified to explain this than me.

 

[Chris D]

Perhaps the add-on installer should have detected that it was running on 2.2 and refused to install which would be an improvement?

That's what I'm saying.

Add-on developers can mark their add-ons to require a specific minimum XF version. Andy didn't do this, hence causing the problem.

 

[FTL]

Naughty AndyB then.

I've just read the announcement for 2.4 and it sounds great, really looking forward to it. Glad your updates have become more timely now. This will really revitalise the XF community and help to dispel the negative feelings so many express nowadays about the state of the product.

Linked here for reference:

Thread 'Coming soon: XenForo 2.4'

Sep 13, 2024

We are excited to announce the upcoming release of XenForo 2.4, bringing you exciting new features and improvements!

While XenForo 3.0 continues to be developed behind the scenes, we've decided to harness the team's enthusiasm and momentum to deliver an interim update that will enhance your XenForo experience sooner than you might have expected. This approach allows us to provide you with valuable improvements without waiting for the full style overhaul that 3.0 will bring.

XenForo 2.4 will focus on quality-of-life enhancements for admins, moderators, and users alike. We're dedicated to...

• XenForo
• Replies: 0
• Forum: Announcements

• 
• 
• 

 

[Mr Lucky]

If the add-on worked properly, it would be marked to require a minimum XF version so that this kind of thing isn't possible.

I've noticed that many addons that are marked ONLY for 2.3 will (and should) refuse to install on 2.2. How do I know you ask? It was just wishful thinking and, of course, on a test site. However I did find many addons that weren't marked for 2.3 but stil worked fine on 2.3 - including XenForo addons I believe.

 

[Chris D]

There are pretty much no official XenForo add-ons for 2.2 that will work correctly on 2.3 as the JavaScript will be broken. I think the exception is Resource Manager which doesn't ship its own JavaScript.

 

[Mr Lucky]

There are pretty much no official XenForo add-ons for 2.2 that will work correctly on 2.3 as the JavaScript will be broken.

Also Redirects for vBulletin - wasn't marked for 2.3 but works fine. EDIT: I see the overview has now been updated but at the time I went with it on a live 2.3 it was not marked as compatible. I assumed it would be fine as I can't see why redirects would not work and testing showed that it did work.

 

[Chris D]

Not unsurprising. No JS, no templates. We didn't change much in the in the underlying code that would adversely affect the majority of add-ons.