Subject: Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 09:20am
By: LWC

With the coming of v1.4.1, I figured it was time I'd take matters in my own hands and give a whole makeover to those outdated plugins which also happen to be the most important plugins of Geeklog (Media Gallery aside as it's as active as ever).

I welcome you all to visit my brand new forums, to beta test the plugins and discuss them and even submit feature requests.

Once I get some good feedback, I'd release the final versions officially in this site.

A quick summary of highlights (Visit my forums for the full lists):

Common highlights:



The forum plugin:



Filemgmt:



Chatterblock:



MultiFAQ:


Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 05:42pm
By: DeadEd

Hi

This is a little confusing now ... have you taken over these projects or do you just have a bad naming convention?

I would be expecting these to come from portalparts based upon name and especially the continuing version number (following on from the existing plugins with the existing name). Shouldn't these be called LWC-Forum, LWC-Chatterblock, etc ?


Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 06:58pm
By: LWC

I thought about it, but it's not like I created original plugins. I just made new versions out of existing ones. I don't want to take credit for the basis. Besides, confusing would be if we have 2 versions of each plugin.

My goal is for my versions to be recognized as the new official versions, and if Blaine ever adds new features, I wish he would just continue my versions.

I also plan to actively maintain those plugins from now on.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 07:14pm
By: Anonymous

dude, that's extremely rude.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 09:48pm
By: LWC

What is rude? My wish to maintain credit for Blaine?

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 09:54pm
By: Anonymous

1) your filemanager does not work. it points to the forum.

2) There will be a release of the MultiFAQ-plugin for 1.4.1 soon. How do you think users will differentiate between your version and my version? Dont you think it would be appropriate in the interest of the users to indicate that there are two different branches now? You should change the name of your release if you ask me to help the users understand that it is not the same software.

3) why are you not talking about this to the original plugin-authors? It would make look things a lot less agressive and confusing if you coordinated your efforts with the original authors,especially if you expect them to work on your codebase in the future.

4) There is such a think as CVS, you know, where several authors can work at the same project. I would have welcomed a joint effort on the plugin, but you do not seem to want that. Multifaq is on sf.net for example.

5) if you multifaq is "finished" as opposed to the current version (when is software finished?), I wonder why you dont use it on your own site? I would like to see how it works with 1.4.1.

6) You say "Visit my forums for the full lists". All your topics are locked however and the links to the singe topics point to the filemanagemnt (?)

-- added 1hr later --
7) the files are not downloadable. Do not announce new plugins and then be unable to provide even a working link to the files. That does not really help the user's confidence that the author is capable of producing proper work

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 10:03pm
By: Anonymous

Aditionally, you are breaking the plugins. If I give out a version 4 of my plugin tomorrow, how will updates work? Or are you telling me that I have to rename my plugin now because you dont want to?

If people do not know there are two different versions, they will try to apply my update to your version or the other way round which will really mess up their system beyond repair.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 10:37pm
By: Anonymous

So you made a few changes and now they are your plugins? Thanks for confusing everyone and not working with the orginal authors. This is darn close to piracy and not ethical.

I doubt you will be able to upload these changes to this site.

I would suggest you work with the authors. I'm sure they are willing to take help.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 24/09/2006 11:17pm
By: knuckles

LWC, I find your efforts, and invitation to your forum, highly offensive. You are showing no regard for the hard work done by long term developers on this site and you show zero consideration for them as well as for the users of this site by forking the plugins and refusing to change the plugin names, versioning, or ownership.

You are going to confuse and frustrate everyone on this site and ultimately create a support war between you, the users, and the developers that you are disrespecting.

If you had any decentcy you would submit the changes you made directly to the authors of the plugins. But I suspect that you are incapable of this, your actions reveal your need for attention and adoration. A true machismo personality if I ever saw one.

If you have any decentcy in you you'll do one of two things:

1) Take complete reponsibility and change the versions to 1.0 and CHANGE ALL the plugin names and never post them on this site. If you want to fork these plugins, take it elsewere. We don't need to hear about it, AND we HAVE fully functioning forums and faq plugins thanks very much.
2) The honorable choice would be to ask Dirk to delete this topic and have you hand the changes to the developers that deserve better than to have someone like you tell the world they suck while you rock simply because you made it possible to read right to left.

But again, I don't think you are capable of this. People like you COMMAND attention (machismo), so I eagerly await your flame so we can all see you for who you really are.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 03:48am
By: Robin

I can see a lot of emotions in the postings here.
However I would like to ask who actually saw, downloaded, installed, any of the mentioned above plugins.

All I can see now it's words, words,...

Words can be dangerous

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 04:30am
By: Anonymous

As mentioned above, the downloads do not work on his site.
Secondly I rather discuss this with LWC before they start working and the damage is done. I am very much concerned about the users that try to upgrade his version with my soon to be released version of MultiFAQ (or the other way round, depending what version number I will give it).

If there is any way to stop it, I think the strong reactions on this topic are in place to du so.
Next to the question if this whole thing is an intelligent thing to do (does he want to take over support for my previous releases?) it is very much a question of ethics, where pure reason (as much as I try to stick to) is not possible. Therefore the emotions are in good order and necessary to point out the ethical questions of this topic.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 04:38am
By: Robin

[QUOTE BY= tokyoahead]Therefore the emotions are in good order and necessary to point out the ethical questions of this topic.[/QUOTE]

You've got a point here

What I just wanted to say was that maybe this is some kind of a joke, as there are a lot of words (see the first post) and no evidence like files to download, etc.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 04:46am
By: Anonymous

No it is not a joke. As I just found out, the downloads do work as long as you know how to wok around his bugged url-rewriting. The files are there, and the changes are there (though minimal)

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 05:48am
By: LWC

Wow, just lynch me and get it over with...

The "download problem" was just me putting the forum's index.php in filemgmt's folder. What one second can do...

Ok, first of all you're mixing Tokyoahead and Blaine. The irony is Tokyoahead is the lesser problem, believe it or not. So I'lll have to start with Blaine even though he didn't even attack me. Well, Blaine doesn't answer my e-mail messages. Blaine has never once replied to me in his own forums. I've submitted him detailed solutions and not just whiny "please fix this...somehow!" bug reports. I gave the exact solution and nothing. Nada. As for Chatterblock, he basically dropped this plugin years ago. As for Filemgmt, he updates it like once in a year, then adds more updates, than leaves it for another year. Relatively to that, his Forum plugin is active, but in reality not really. And what CVS?!

As for Mr. Nice Guy Tokyoahead, at least he answers e-mail. But sorry buddy, you've got some nerve. I've asked you time and time again to fix the problems and you didn't do anything. So I fixed them and now your solution is to basically ignore my fixes and just continue on your own.

Fine, if you want it so bad, I'll sit through each of these plugins and make them work in other folders than their originals so I could rename them in essence and not just in principle.

But if you ask me, it's insane that after I, say, made Chatterblock use Spam-X, Blaine (again, I'm sorry as you haven't even said it so far) would release a new version that wouldn't use Spam-X to spite me or after I made MultiFAQ stop hardcoding English phrases and let the admin decide what is the top X, Tokyoahead will keep hardcoding English phrases and force us to show the top 10 always just to prove I'm "Machismo" (hey, yo).

Using the same logic, I'll have to run after each new version you release and make it stop hardcode English phrases and make Filemgmt register_globals free, etc. after each new version that comes out just because some egos were hurt.

P.S.
Who says I must use MultiFAQ on my own site? Personally I rather have all of the questions in one page (maybe I'll make a choice that will enable MultiFAQ to do this...), so I reserve it for other sites.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 06:12am
By: Anonymous

[QUOTE BY= LWC] As for Mr. Nice Guy Tokyoahead, at least he answers e-mail. But sorry buddy, you've got some nerve. I've asked you time and time again to fix the problems and you didn't do anything. So I fixed them and now your solution is to basically ignore my fixes and just continue on your own.
[...]
if I made MultiFAQ stop hardcoding English phrases and let the admin what is the top X, Tokyoahead will keep hardcoding English phrases and force us to show the top 10 always just to prove I'm "Machismo" (hey, yo).[/QUOTE]

1) You are missing the point here: There is a completely different issue between
a) fixing bugs, implementing small new features and
b) distributing the code using the same name for the plugin and continuing the version count.
I even TOLD you that the next version will be out with 1.4.1 since the latest changes I did are connected to changes in GL and you cannot use them until you get 1.4.1!

2) "I've asked you time and time again to fix the problems and you didn't do anything." ? I did not only answer your emails but cut SEVEN special releases together for you and worked together with you to get your features done! That is your thanks? Trying to take over my plugin and make all its users blame me if your code does not work or my updates dont work on your version?

3) I DID the Top-x (instead of only top10) feature and other things in the versions I sent you. Its not only in CVS, but I SENT THEM to you by EMAIL. Where is your problem??

4) You are confusing who is calling you Machismo and who is not. I am calling you "one big, fat liar", not Machismo.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 06:31am
By: LWC

But I liked the machismo more...

Well, what can I say? It just wasn't fully working and/or hardcoded English phrases. Speaking of the latter, for me actually being able to use MultiFAQ in none English sites is more than "small fixes", but oh well, that's just me.

With that said, my changes in MultiFAQ are really just extra. I've added brand new features to Chatterblock and re-innovated the Forum. The Filemgmt is somewhere in between.

Besides, I've already said I'd rename the plugins and once that's done, I'll participate in a never ending chase to re-apply Spam-X to each new Chatterblock version, make each new Forum version register_globals free or whatever. As long as you'll be happy. Now let's wait to see if Blaine comes yelling too so I'll know for sure that any chance of co-working in these plugins is doomed.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 08:44am
By: Anonymous

Well what you will have to understand is that people will only let you work with them if they trust you on the following:

1) that your ideas are things that can benefit more people than just yourself
2) that your code is actually usable, and that you will provide updates and fixes over time
3) that you will work in an acceptable speed with an acceptable quality by yourself, in close coordination with the plugins/codes main author
4) you have to work on the CVS version, not the latest release. Otherwise people have to trace back how hteir code worked before and implement the changes all over again. so go and download their CVS or ask them for a copy in case they dont have a public accessible CVS

best thing is to write your own plugin to show people the quality of your work. otherwise all is just empty promises.

And do NOT do the following:
1) You cannot just come and say "do this, here is some fix" and expect everybody to jump up and implement your code, or even fix things without providing a patch on the CVS code.
2) do not expect someone to work with you at all. Most of the people do not write the plugins as their main profession and program during some days a lot and stop for weeks in between. often this makes it impossible to work together with other people.
3) dont start such a ignorant and pirate-like action as you just did. Chances are that people will simply ignore you forthe rest of your life.

I would not be surprised if Blaine does so. I surely wont implement any feature just because you ask me to again, simply because of your lie about the top10 code, even if I ignore whole thing above. You blew it, in short terms.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 09:07am
By: LWC

Ok, I'm tired of this. It's obvious you think in more close source terms than Microsoft. I don't know why you even like Geeklog. You should find yourself a close source project and release close source plugins for it where no one in the world could even touch your code. As for support ,you don't even have a forum for your plugin and your last official version is from 2004, but you're teaching me about support and speed, great.

Ok, maybe I just imagined the "Top X" was hardcoded in English. Maybe I imagined the "Last X" was too. Maybe I imagined the links in the stats failed because you didn't implement url_rewrite but linked using just that. But overall it's funny because for the 10th time (and now you'll probably count and say I lied about the count), your plugin was just extra and now it took over this topic. Blaine is the main reason for all of this and he has no CVS.

Listen, for all it matters I apologize - to you, to the devoted anonymous users that come to these forums to develop Geeklog, and to the world. In the spirit of MultiFAQ that means (good thing this site went Unicode) slicha, traurig, désolé and apesadumbrado. After I'll fix the fact you didn't provide an easy way to rename the folder of the plugin, I'll rename it and we'll have 2 plugins that do that same things (except mine gives credit to you and yours probably won't give credit to me), and maybe some day you'll add my fixes and maybe some other day I'll add your future version's fixes. As long as you're happy.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 09:47am
By: Anonymous

well just for the record, I dont want to breed misunderstandings here.

I mentioned the first points as a general fact not as something specific that you did wrong.

and btw I do not have a fourm on my site because there is one on sourceforge in case people prefer that and because I do most of my support by email.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 11:07am
By: LWC

Thanks for lowering the tone. But if we're sincere let's mention in Sourceforge that forum has 2 automated welcome messages from 2004 and your mailing list has one member (you probably). Oh, and there's one bug report...from yourself.

Now don't get me wrong, I do thank you for your help over the e-mail. You helped out and it was great but you did a fraction of what should have been done and then you stopped writing altogether. Things like making it stop hardcoding English, fixing the dead stat links, making it register_globals free, letting Geeklog detect the version, stop ruining the site when anon users check the stats, to name a few things - if you download it, there are about 2 pages of fixes of I did. Now that it's all fixed I find it a little sad you'd ignore it all because it wasn't you personally (in open source scripts!) that fixed it.

I didn't "take over". For all I care use what I did. But to think you'll keep your plugin, say, register_globals trapped just to prove you're a man is...sad. Sad for the users of Geeklog and sad for the open source movement which you insist to be a part of even though you conveniently turn against it the minute it doesn't work in your favor (even though I never took away your credit).

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 11:14am
By: Anonymous

[QUOTE BY= LWC] Thanks for lowering the tone. .[/QUOTE]
And then you reply by using your same arrogant tone - no wonder the plugin developers don't want to work with you - who would

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 11:26am
By: LWC

So what do you want me to say? Should I just let everybody understand he has a forum and I'm an idiot for saying he doesn't? What do you want from me? I took my time and tried to help the Geeklog project and then I stand alone while everybody attacks me. And then even though I'm about the only one in this topic who didn't use a flame word, I'm considered the attacker because I have the nerve to defend myself.

You want arrogant? I sit for weeks fixing millions of bugs in 4 outdated plugins and then get flamed by anonymous users that have probably never contributed a single line of code to Geeklog.

This was supposed to a topic in which people report about the plugins and ask for new features, not a who's got a bigger *$# competition.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 11:43am
By: Benta

[QUOTE BY= LWC] So what do you want me to say?[/QUOTE]

Try something like:

"Ooops, sorry everyone, I screwed up. I realize now that this was a bad idea and that I should have talked to all the plugin authors first, at least out of courtesy, but also because of purely practical matters. "

And don't add anything to it that looks like you are trying to place blame elsewhere or point out other people's mistakes, so that it's clear that you know you were the one messing up here.

It's really that simple.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 01:06pm
By: LWC

So it's not ok to politely point out others' mistakes, but it's ok to point out mine and flame me. Makes sense.

Well, I did write in Blaine's forum and told him over e-mail I plan to update myself if he doesn't (and offered the fixes to make it register_global free, etc.). That was like a year ago.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 03:04pm
By: Anonymous

What LWC did is commendable. To everyone else in this thread: SHAME ON YOU!

As long as he kept credits intact in the source, LWC's actions fall under the full spirit and intent of GPL. Those chastising him here show ignorance of its terms and give the open source movement a bad name.

Under GPL, there is no requirement for anyone to ask permission or contact the original programmers before releasing modified versions. If you don't like this, use a different license because you all sure look stupid going after someone who is correctly following a license which the authors chose.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 03:33pm
By: Anonymous

[QUOTE BY= Mike] What LWC did is commendable. To everyone else in this thread: SHAME ON YOU!

As long as he kept credits intact in the source, LWC's actions fall under the full spirit and intent of GPL. Those chastising him here show ignorance of its terms and give the open source movement a bad name.

Under GPL, there is no requirement for anyone to ask permission or contact the original programmers before releasing modified versions. If you don't like this, use a different license because you all sure look stupid going after someone who is correctly following a license which the authors chose.[/QUOTE]


I too can buy a Chevrolet, remove the Chevrolet symbol, replace it with my own, make modifications to the engine, interior and wiring and then re-sell the call as a "Shevrolet".

Sounds the same, looks the same, but its not the same. The Buyer couldn't take the "Shevy" back to a "Chevrolet" dealer for service and may be absolutelly confused as to why.

This has nothing to do with the GPL, but more to do with proper ethical forking of a project and not releasing it under the same name.


Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 04:40pm
By: artur

Hi,

this is part from GPL (general public license)
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt
--- copied text ---
If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we
want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so
that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original
authors' reputations. 

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 07:30pm
By: Anonymous

[QUOTE BY= LWC]But if we're sincere let's mention in Sourceforge that forum has 2 automated welcome messages from 2004 and your mailing list has one member (you probably). Oh, and there's one bug report...from yourself.[/QUOTE]

Of course you are right! no-one is using those forums on sourceforge.
but if people dont ask questions in those forums and dont leave comments on the website, I do not see a reason why I would need a forum installed on my site.
People send me email, and thats fine.

[QUOTE BY= LWC]You want arrogant? I sit for weeks fixing millions of bugs in 4 outdated plugins and then get flamed by anonymous users that have probably never contributed a single line of code to Geeklog.[/QUOTE]

No-one is blaming you for releasing new versions of the code. The problem lies ONLY within using the same name. Only that. You can release 10 new version of my code as long as it has a different name for the plugin. I would be happy. I would not look down to you ONE BIT or write ANY negative comment on the release-announcement.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 09:34pm
By: LWC

[QUOTE Wikipedia]
Open-source software is computer software whose source code is available under a copyright license that permits users to study, change, and improve the software, and to redistribute it in modified or unmodified form.[/QUOTE]

I thought you'd be happy to take my code and go from there, now that it's register_globals free and all, but you say you rather leave your version outdated until you do it yourself (and probably just repeat what I did) than accept fixes you didn't ask for. You rather leave the links in the stats broken (until you fix them personally) than accept my fix for that and so on.

The bottom line is everything has to go through you because it's your open source software - how can you not see the paradox? I still don't understand what ever drew you to open source code. Obviously you hate the very concept of open source software. As long as your code's name is used, you want your code to be yours and yours alone (and if you don't update, tough for us. Like Samson, you're taking the temple down with you), you want everything to go through you, you want to have total control. I'm not saying everyone must like open source, but you don't see Microsoft using open source in the first place.

By what you said above, it sounds to me your philosophy is more of that of a freeware concept. Unfortunately, you're in the wrong project.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 10:02pm
By: Anonymous

What you have to understand is that the version you held was not the version that is the most advanced in existance. I continued to make a version that would work with GL 1.4.1

It is the same as if you took version 1.1 and made a version 2. I do not want to work again on version 1.1 even though you fixed 1 or two things that I did not fix until now. That is why I do not want to work with your version. And I want to continue workin on the sf.net site, and on tokyoahead.com since thats where the users come to get the "Multifaq" plugin.

Just the fact that you have a forum does not change anything. I had a forum installed on my site and closed it since the people kept sending email and it was not used.

And you are right, it does not have to go "through me". But if there is a change from me to you there has to be a proper transition so that no code is lost and that the users are taken along the path so updates would not break.

And I will have to be ready so that it goes "through you". If I do not want to do that for whatever reason, you will be forced to use a different name since that is what the release license says. You are simply not allowed to release a modified version under the same name without me allowing you to do so.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/09/2006 11:39pm
By: DTrumbower

[QUOTE BY= LWC]
The bottom line is everything has to go through you because it's your open source software - how can you not see the paradox? I still don't understand what ever drew you to open source code. Obviously you hate the very concept of open source software. As long as your code's name is used, you want your code to be yours and yours alone (and if you don't update, tough for us. Like Samson, you're taking the temple down with you), you want everything to go through you, you want to have total control. I'm not saying everyone must like open source, but you don't see Microsoft using open source in the first place.[/QUOTE]

Open source does not equal no source control. Every project has controls on the software development process. You have designers, coders, code reviewers and qa. It is not a free for all.

It's quite simple, if someone makes changes to an existing project, you work on the current code base or submit changes that can easily be merged. Current code base doesn't mean the lastest version. If for some reason the above doens't work out, then feel free to FORK the project and call it a NEW NAME AND VERSION. That is the double edge sword of GPL. But you do need to call it something else.

Some decisions need to be made. Either work with the existing plugin authors or fork the plugins. I would like to see you work with the authors. It looks to me that tokyoahead has opened the door your you to help. I would continue the conversion on the plugin mailing list, IRC or email.

Hopefully the decisions made will help the community.

D

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 26/09/2006 01:22am
By: DeadEd

What you have basically said (through your actions) by releasing these projects as newer versions of the existing ones is that you are taking over those projects.

As a user, this could be a simple "oh ok, the development has shifted from Mr X to Mr Y" but this is not the case ... Mr X is still carrying on. Now the problems for the average user are "Whose version do I use? Who do I turn to if there are problems? What happens when Mr X releases a new version after I have taken Mr Ys version?"

You have said in a previous post that you don't want to take credit for the basis of the plugins, which I think some others may have overlooked. I don't think anyone is slamming you for making an effort, just the way you are doing it. If you are unhappy with the way the current projects go then, as GPLd code, you can take it and make a fork and drive it in the direction you wish. If you choose to do this though then you are the one that has to do the work if the original plugin author(s) release a new version and you want to keep up. You will have chosen to fork, not them. However, I would say that making a fork should be for a better reason than just to provide a few updates to an existing (in development) plugin.

As a wise person recently said "Hopefully the decisions made will help the community". I think you can clearly see that the current course is not doing so, yet the solution is so simple.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 27/09/2006 04:21pm
By: kemal

I tryed to instaling forum v4 and chatter block v4..
forum gived some errors and chatterblock cannot installed..
Fatal error: Call to undefined function: plugin_uninstall_chatterblock() in /home/.crusader/kcellat/moderntalking.biz/mt/admin/plugins/chatterblock/install.php on line 157

i am not recommend this plugins!!!!

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 27/09/2006 07:27pm
By: LWC

Would you change your code quote to just quote? The wrapping was crippled because of this.

Anyway, I said from the start I'll only release them officially after public testing, so if you don't feel like testing and don't want the new fixes and features (especially if you're talking about Chatterblock), just don't download instead of causing a mayhem.

You've already reported the forum bug in my forums and thanks to your report I quickly solved it for everyone, re-uploaded it, and also wrote to you how to personally fix it in your specific situation. If you reported the error about Chatterblock there, it would probably have been fixed by now, but that's not as exciting I guess.

So as for Chatterblock, I'd like to ask you to also quote Geeklog's own error log. Plus tell me this - are you completely sure you didn't mix files with the old version? Because I haven't even touched plugin_uninstall_chatterblock. It's right there in functions.inc

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 27/09/2006 07:56pm
By: Anonymous

LWC, just as a reminder:

If you continue distributing under the original names, you are violating the GPL.

Please stop doing so. Do all of us original authors the favour of respect, avoid take those versions of your website and change the names before you put them back or send versions of it out by email.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 06:36am
By: casper

To the best for the community
Yes, please. I will not defend or offend anyone.
Many plugins are outdated, and when updated this comes fairly late after a upgrade of GL that require some changes in the plugins.
Geeklog could be even better, if all plugins and themes could be updated and released at the same time as an upgrade og GL.
In that way all elements could function together!
If anyone have a fix or update for any plugin, why not use the help that are supplied? (plugin developers)
I have the impression that if a plugin developer does not find his/hers plugin usefull for theirselves, the plugin are laid dead.
There are many plugins that I, and others, have found usefull, and had to track down via all sorts of sites to find an old version and rework several functions to make it work on newer installs of GL.
When a plugin has had no development for over a year, often it seems that plugins for GL are not a priority!
To be a bit on the edge; often it seems that the only plugins for GL are forum (when will v 2.5 be ready btw), filemgmt, and .. well thats it.
If all plugins for GL could be updated along the way with new versions of GL, Im sure that the other good features of GL would be considered to be taken in use by a lot more users than for now.

I find LWC effort to improve plugins that has had no or little development in the last a very good initiative, but I agree in that releasing under the same name as the old plugin in best case would be confusing and make the users lose control over what plugins has what features and so on.
There are a few examples when a take-over of a plugin has been a good thing, an example is the stats-plugin who are continued under the name GUS.
But when the original author has not stopped working on his plugin, of cource this can not be done. But I hope that in the future an plugin-author could be available when a user finds things that could be improved, and work together to update the codebase.
I have several times in this forum or by mail helped with fixing bugs and find new features for plugins, and almost as many times talked to a brick-wall with other authors. The result varies likewise.

How to make the plugin development and maintenance more smooth and keep up the work to follow new versions of GL?

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 06:53am
By: Anonymous

[QUOTE BY= casper] If all plugins for GL could be updated along the way with new versions of GL, Im sure that the other good features of GL would be considered to be taken in use by a lot more users than for now.[/QUOTE]

you are right. There is only one problem:

manpower.

For example, I am developing 3-5 different projects now, next to my normal job. On of them is the geeklog core code, another a completely different CMS. Over the last two releases I have re-written polls, links & the calendar plugins in adition to that. All other developers for the core and the major plugins have the same issue. And I dont get a cent for that, not even the link back to my site that I ask for in some of the code I write. There is more abuse then praise for that matter.

Further, most people who ask for features are even too lazy to help the developers by filling out a feature request form or a bug report on the project pages of the software, let alone contributing code.
Its not that I get tons of emails for my plugins, and you see my tracker on sf.net and there is nothing either. How can I know what is important for people if there is only 1 person asking for something in 6 months?

The upcoming issues with hackers and spammers take even more time for the core away from the plugins. And in adition, there is not always a necessity to update the plugin when its working allright with the current release of GL. Most of the time its about nice-to-have features, not great new developement.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 08:53am
By: Blaine

I have to agree totally with Tokyoahead not only because I know how hard he has worked on the Core GL 1.4.1 release the past months but because he also spends a great deal of time supporting users with questions. I have the same priorities and demands on my time and have been very active on the most recent GL release - you may want to subscribe to CVS updates to see how much time and late evenings are freely contributed, or read the included history file. We don't ask for much - but yes, that effects the many other projects we have contributed in the past as plugins.

Our plugin projects are not abandoned but are prioritized and we are not always able to release as many updates. It takes a lot more effort to release and support a new version then one first thinks and so releasing a plugin with one change unless it's a security issue or serious SEV1 (can not use - no workaround) bug then it should be combined.

Example: I have over 100 hours into a new forum release (yes - I got your indirect reference Casper) but my progress gets delayed and my free GL times first goes to User support then GL 1.4.1 work. I have often set aside time to work on the Forum and have had to spend the weekend on GL 1.4.1 work the past months.

Working together on a plugin (which I have done many times) first requires being able to work together (respect, appreciation, enjoyment) and scheduling of our time. We are very fortunate that the Core GL team has all of this.

I can not stop someone from taking my hard work and freely contributed plugins and stomping all over them, changing a few lines and releasing a new version. I only ask as Tokyoahead has stated - change the name and ensure they do not in anyway reference the same name or conflict with an original installed version - And yes - retain all references to the original author.



Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 10:48am
By: asmaloney

As someone who has both taken over from another author [Visitor Stats/GUS], and had a plugin taken over by someone else [GL_Gallery2/G2 Bridge], I thought I'd chime in here.

In both those cases, I discussed with the other developer the ifs/whens/hows/ to make a smooth transition. In both cases, the names were changed to avoid confusion. In the case of the stats I worked damn hard to make sure the old data could be migrated to provide continuity between the two plugins. In both cases, all parties involved were mature about it and worked together.

When I read the first post I thought it was quite arrogant of LWC to proceed the way he did. After reading the whole thread through, I still think so. It's not the fact that he made changes and wants to release them - it's that he is releasing them with the same names [and presumably the same db table names which will cause a headache for sure]. To me this isn't about what's allowed/not allowed by the license. It's not about open source vs. closed source mentalities. It's about common decency and respect for others and their work. LWC has failed on both counts.

Now as for what Casper wrote, I think Tokyoahead and Blaine covered that quite well. I just want to vent a little and comment on this:

When a plugin has had no development for over a year, often it seems that plugins for GL are not a priority!


Frankly, they're not. All of the developers of the core and the plugins work for free. This means they are the ones who set the priority - not the users. Family comes before GL development. Paid work comes before GL development. Sitting around relaxing with a whisky [or whiskey depending where you're from] comes before GL development.

The developers have to get something out of it - personal satisfaction, recognition, beefing up the CV - otherwise they would not spend their free time working on free software.

You have to understand that the vast majority of feedback we get [I'm basing this on almost all open source/free source projects I've worked on] fall into these categories:


Not all developers can put up with this day in and day out and still remain interested in what they're doing. Kudos to the core developers.

So please don't bash us because we aren't living up to your expectations - be happy that there is a group of dedicated developers providing cool stuff for free. [By dedicated I mean of course the other developers - I did lose interest and only update things occasionally.]

But now I'm ranting [maybe even raving?]...

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 03:24pm
By: LWC

I Googled for info about GPU and name changes and found such a parallel world it's scary - just thought I'd share.

Blaine, you did leave loop holes because you spoke in general, but I wouldn't call pages and pages of fixes (I just wrote the highlights in this topic and even those were a lot more than) "changing a few lines and releasing a new version". You guys can say a lot of things (and you sure did), but saying what you said is insulting after my weeks of work the results of which I shared with you all for free and with credit inside every file of every plugins. If you even take one element from the list, like making them register_globals free, it's insulting.

asmaloney, you forgot the most evil category of all. The one that even the worst of the worst of your categories can't compete with:
"I know you don't have time and this is broken, so I fixed it for you for free."
The message is simple, no one expects you to work on the plugins, but also not to stop others from doing so (Blaine specifically answered neither e-mail, my topics in his your own forums, nor runs CVS for his plugins that I know of). Especially when they're willing to hand you back the plugins whenever you want to continue your work and all they wanted was for you to have an easier job because the bugs are fixed and you could focus on new features.

With that said...I'm in the process of changing the names (read: tables, paths, function names) which takes a huge amount of time (that could be spent on new features) because you guys didn't really develop the plugins with a possible name change in mind (what's for sure, when I'm done, my versions would have that in mind and I did learn a lot about automating a plugin's properties of all kinds).

I'm finally done with the none MultiFAQ MultiFAQ and it's now in its testing phase (if anyone wants to volunteer, this is the place).

Of course, it means the communitee loses the ability to naturally have their old forums/files/news/(Multi)FAQ in the new versions, but that's the price. I will however work on importing facilities, which of course would take even more time.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 03:39pm
By: asmaloney

[QUOTE BY= LWC]
asmaloney, you forgot the most evil category of all. The one that even the worst of the worst of your categories can't compete with:
"I know you don't have time and this is broken, so I fixed it for you for free."
The message is simple, no one expects you to work on the plugins, but also not to stop others from doing so - especially when they're willing to hand you back the plugin when you want it.
[/QUOTE]

Nobody is trying to stop you working on the plugins, but you just tried to release new versions of plugins under the same name and versioning without the consent of the authors. That's confusing for the users not to mention disrespectful to the developers. If you want to release them - fine - it's within your rights to do so, but fork them properly, don't elbow your way in and try to take them over.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 04:38pm
By: Tony

LWC, let me put it a different way. You lack tact.

All this is sort of like being in an elevator with all of us and having you fart...you offended everyone around you and managed to stink up the joint. All everyone is saying to you is that you could have done all the same things, maybe even earned CVS commit rights to the very projects you hijacked if you only had some....Tact.

Ironically I find the work you did of tremendous value but you approached it in such an a$$backwards fashion that it has overshadowed what you could have accomplished had you only had....you guessed it.

Tact.

My advice to you, is be quiet, regroup (an apology wouldn't be out of order) and see if you can't get on the right track here as I'd hate to see a good-coder go bad.

--Tony

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 28/09/2006 04:49pm
By: LWC

Already said it's in progress. Just tried to show it's not a black/white situation as some would like to believe. Surely not picturing a world where the other person "just changes some lines" and surely not pretending you can be reached when one year old topics sit abandoned on your forums and e-mails go unanswered and there's no CVS. Of course once it's said, you immediately drop this arguement and switch to the "it's my right to be busy" one. And it is! It totally is! But it angers you both to be asked to do things and to have someone else actually doing them.

You implied it yourself when you said if someone doesn't do anything alone and demands you to fix something for them, you find it irritating and unmotivating. But if someone fixes it themselves...you still find it irritating and unmotivating. You basically leave no way out as some aren't even reachable.

And if you claim it's your right to leave no way out, just say it, just say it out loud and stop trying to play both games. Say "it is my damn right to outdate my code! Just fork it if you want and stop stealing." At least don't go around the bush and it would save this endless fighting, that's also useless because I'm already changing the names.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 29/09/2006 12:46am
By: samstone

Say "it is my damn right to outdate my code! Just fork it if you want and stop stealing."


LWC, I think they have already said it.

As a franstrated long term GL user and non-coder, your contribution is a tremendous help. I am sure, I wouldn't have known these rules and might make the same mistake. However, like Tony said, I think you definitely need to be tactful, particularly in your expressions.

Based on my past experience with you, I know you have pure motives and sincere intention to push GL to a higher level. But you tend to express it contentiously.

The plugin owners obviously feel offended (not by what you did) by the way you did it. However, their judgement of your motive is not true.

As far as I know, the GL team does not have GL as their priority. They just work together in the GL enviroment to develop their own professional projects. That's why GL has a great deal of professional quality, but it is only a by product. Unless there is some demand (e.g. by their clients) to move their script to the next level, they have other things, including their family, to be busy with. (Not everyone is Mark Evens, who you and I know presented the most outstanding plugin and support we've ever seen in this community.)

LWC, I think you are a young single man, full of fire. I can see your vision that you want these plugins to become a team product, like the main GL script. Why don't you make it so, since they don't mind that you fork them with new names. You might even draw some co-coders to work with you on these plugins, if you set up a CVS.

Just my 2 cents.

Sam

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 30/09/2006 10:07am
By: samstone

LWC,

You asked me to send you the plugins that don't mind you to give them a lift.

I think EasyFile has great potential and is now abandoned. I don't think the author is around here anymore. Still you can fork it to play safe. I like its usage of the GL permission features.

Another one that I can think of is the Weather Block. It is abandoned too. All Squatty's plugins are abandoned, ever since he got married a couple of years ago. (That's what happen when you get married!).


Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 30/09/2006 02:15pm
By: LWC

No...I asked you to send me people who don't mind helping coding.

How many plugins do you think I can handle alone? I'm already getting interesting feature requests but I'm busy renaming and creating importing facitilies. Not to mention now I have to re-apply everything that the new official MultiFAQ still lacks (like the fact it's not register_globals free like my version by keeping using stuff like $REMOTE_ADDR).

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 30/09/2006 08:14pm
By: Anonymous

like the fact it's not register_globals free like my version by keeping using stuff like $REMOTE_ADDR

You are, as I said, as always, welcome to inform me about bugs and feature requests or submit code to the project. Thats why I explicitly asked for help fixing bug, thats why one releases a RC1.

Of course, you do not have to. You can work by yourself and rework all that stuff for all future releases.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 01/10/2006 07:15pm
By: bjudson

Wow. That was... umm entertaining?

So LWC I'm going to start out by saying "like alot of other people who use Geeklog I appreciate your efforts."

Tokyohead, I agree with you that LWC shouldn't have hijacked your plugin. And LWC, while you were giving him credit, that is what you did. You didn't mean to but you did.

Tokyohead you seem to be a rational person, you have worked to try and leave the possibility open that LWC could contribute to the "official" codebase sometime in the future.

The problem here is that LWC acted without the knowledge of how something like this should be co-ordinated. He seems to be a well skilled programmer, and your comment about how he could write one of his own pulgin (to essentially "prove his worthyness" to contribute) was likely taken by him as insulting. By him (and many GL users) he has proven himself by adding features and bugfixes to YOUR plugin. I can understand your anger at the time, cuz he just couldn't figure out when to shut up, or that you were trying to extend an olive branch.

I wouldn't be writing if that was all there was to it though... I frankly don't want to choose between feature A or feature B of essentially the same plug-in. This will save everyone users, and developers a lot of work. That is if Tokyohead you are willing to do so, and if LWC can put behind the bitterness and learn from his well intentioned mistake.

LWC the "proper" way of contributing (as you have probably learned now) to a plug-in is to contact the developer. If the developer won't agree or won't reply, then FORK the plug-in.

But you probably don't have to fork all your current work!!!

Take the version that you modified and create a diff (for the patch program) from the version you modified from. This will give the changes you implemented. Then start re-writing them for the latest version of the plug-in (from CVS). Submit the new diff's as patches to tokyohead (where it would be best to implement one feature at a time so he can keep things straight). Tokyohead can then agree to commit or reject your patch. If he really wants the help (and it sounds like he would like the help from a qualified coder) he will commit the code or reject it with a reason and we can all work as one team.

Ideally you will both be good friends after a few exchanges of patches, where you both learn to respect each other, author/maintainer and developer.

LWC As you have already said you will have to re-work this whole thing for Tokyohead's 1.4.1 release anyway you might as well stop the bleeding now, you seem fairly rational (aside from this thread where you are mostly just angry and hurt that people didn't appreciate your hard work, after your initial post).

This doesn't have to just be Tokyohead either, all the plugin-ins can be done this way. If you don't want to be constantly chasing the latest version and re-applying your changes then this is best for everyone.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 01/10/2006 08:34pm
By: kemal

i installed again (fixed version of) forum to my other test site.
Then i opened a topic, assigned mods.
i want to say letters are very very small ( i was blinding!)
and on the forum settings page only Location showing and running!!!

lets try to forum:

looking very good (same as old version)
but when i opening a topic says
Read-Only Forum
Access Denied! Only the Moderators can post to this forum
but i didnt check read only box!!

this (copy) versions like a bug machine!..


Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 01/10/2006 08:36pm
By: kemal

oh i forget it!

adding mod. not working too!

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 01/10/2006 09:17pm
By: LWC

Kemal, I didn't touch the CSS so I can't comment. If/when I touch it, I'll change everything to EM. As for the bugs, have you fixed your upgrade problem? Because I do all of the stuff you said without any problems whatsoever. And make sure you always use the latest version (I update it all the time) before you comment.

bjudson, I'm sorry I answer when being talked to even though you think only the other side has the right to keep defending itself to infinity. I'm also sorry it's irrational in your eyes to defend my work. Also, unlike what you said, that was the insulting part.

For example, I've halted the forking of MultiFAQ and instead submitted all of my work to Tokyoahead's Sourceforge page as bug fixes and patches. Even though I've "only changed a few lines" (that, dear bjudson, is what makes me "irrational"), somehow I (and I'm the only one in his page except maybe people who just watch) raised his page's activity to 98.73%.
Now the ball is in your court, Tokyoahead. I have no desire to start a useless fork the forking of which takes more time than the real work itself, but at some point I'll have to bother so as not to give up on those fixes and new features.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 01/10/2006 10:05pm
By: kemal

i am not fixed the ugrade problem (turn to original version). I said before, i tryed to other site. And i didn't upgrade, i installed from zero.. and i said before, i installed lastest fixed version

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 01/10/2006 11:39pm
By: samstone

LWC,

I tested your version of Filemgmt, just to sample it, and I ran into an error that locked me out of my site.

Now I understand why you insist on helping, rather than forking. You are a good trouble shooter and great assistant, like the way you help Mark Evans on track with the bugs. Now, I don't have confidence that you can handle a fork, (No pun intended!) unless you are able to draw some help from others.

Just a thought!

Sam

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 02/10/2006 06:56am
By: LWC

All this speech simply because you can't run "mb_substr" ("call to undefined function")? Which PHP version do you have? php.net says it comes with v4.0.6 while Geeklog's minimum is v4.1.0 so I don't get it. Ask whoever is in charge of your server what is going on.

In any case, I'm warning you ahead that it's used in many places. I rather write a big "if you use this plugin, make sure you can use mb_substr" title than a "if you use this plugin, usage of RTL in your files' descriptions would ruin your site and life as we know it".

I have a good search and replace program though. I can replace in some seconds each and every occurence of mb_substr with substr and release it with the latter title. But if I can't work with a v4.0.6 command like mb_substr, who knows what else I can't work with?

With that said, already encouraged you to send me help from othes...

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 02/10/2006 07:14am
By: LWC

P.S.
The new calendar plugin uses mb_substr (if your site uses UTF-8, which is the default in v1.4.1), so maybe you should send Dirk packing to the help department too.

Alas, a simple Google search led me to a solution. Seems like you need "enable-mbstring" enabled in your PHP install. Go ahead and tell your server's admin because you should do it for v1.4.1 anyway.

From php.net:

mbstring is a non-default extension. This means it is not enabled by default. You must explicitly enable the module with the configure option.
...
--enable-mbstring: Enable mbstring functions. This option is required to use mbstring functions.

I'll go help Dirk prepare the suitcases.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 02/10/2006 02:51pm
By: samstone

You make it sound that it was my stupidity that makes me run into this error.

I manage my own servers. My PHP is 4.4.3 and I am running GL 1.4.1b1 and I have no problem running the GL Calendar.

LWC, you are a smart guy. But, the way you treat other as stupid would make you run into more problems. I don't know if anyone would like to help you with the way you speak down on them?

Sam

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 02/10/2006 06:26pm
By: LWC

I've just quoted from the calendar. Maybe your language in Geeklog isn't in Unicode and/or maybe you've just never used the function in the calendar that uses this command.

I'll be a happy person when I understand why is it ok for you to tell me to stick to the help support for an error you later took self blame for (and even if it's not your fault, Dirk will cause you the same error too), but no matter what and how I say I sound bad. Believe me I wouldn't "talk down" on you if you just came and reported an error and asked me to fix it without, well, talking down on me yourself (for an error you later found out Geeklog itself will cause you, so why was the slander needed?).

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 02/10/2006 07:20pm
By: samstone

Guess I am the last one that is stupid enough to engage in this dialog out of sympathy. Its seems that you have determined to isolate yourself.

Good luck!

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 02/10/2006 08:39pm
By: LWC

Just wanted to thank Tokyoahead who stood up to his word and said he agreed to implement my suggestions and looks like he works hard on the CVS. Hope to see the new version soon!

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 03/10/2006 02:33am
By: Anonymous

if you use this plugin, make sure you can use mb_substr


You do not need to use mb_substr in 1.4.1 anymore. I wrote a library called lib-mbyte where all important functions are replaced by a conditional workaround in case mb_-functions are not available:

You can use MBYTE_substr instead of mb_substr etc. It will then work for all systems and use mb-functions where available.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 03/10/2006 06:39am
By: LWC

Very slick! I especially liked the part it saves us from setting up ourselves mb_internal_encoding in our php.ini. Now I wonder if I should change my mb_internal_encoding back to its default and let Geeklog change it for me on will.

2 problems though (although they're general and not your fault):
  1. Can sites use Unicode without installing mbstring in their PHP? I hope the answer is no because then your solution really makes perfect sense.
  2. It's still too early to pose v1.4.1 as a system requirement, so I guess for now the system requirement of "installing mbstring" would have to do.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 03/10/2006 09:18pm
By: Anonymous

the new functions do not replace the mb_string functions as such. they simply allow plugin writers to not worry about them. they simply detect if mb_string is available on the server and use it if yes, and use normal string functions if not. so unicode does not work properly if you dont have mb_string.

the problem with the internal encoding is that the changing might be blocked by the server. so you will still have to go through php.ini. also when writing software you have to accomodate that users might get into trouble.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 04/10/2006 07:11am
By: LWC

Not being able to rely the users have v1.4.1 yet aside, this is the problem:

Old situation:
Always assume mbstring isn't installed (result: plugin simply can't be used by admins who use Unicode in it).

My solution:
Always assume mbstring is installed (result: plugin simply can't be used by admins who didn't install mbstring).

Your solution:
Use both ways, but...if it's possible for an admin to use Unicode without installing mbstring, we get the old situation back. So is it possible? If you say it's not, it solves everything.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 04/10/2006 06:02pm
By: Anonymous

Use both ways, but...if it's possible for an admin to use Unicode without installing mbstring, we get the old situation back. So is it possible? If you say it's not, it solves everything.


I dont really get the meaning of this sentence.

The best for you as a plugin dev, ship lib-mbyte with your plugin. rename the functions also so 1.4.1 user wont get errors. Then you cater to both.

and again, unicode _works_ without mb_string, simply counting letters in a word does not, and substr() returns broken last letters and very short strings if you want to cut a string to allow it to fit in a block etc. I cannot think of a place right now where it would seriously break a function right now.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 05/10/2006 07:08am
By: LWC

If an admin uses Unicode in their plugin without installing mbstring (if it's possible), then your function would use substr and therefore break that admin's Unicode (the way the plugins act now).

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 05/10/2006 04:52pm
By: Anonymous

Admins do not 'use Unicode in their plugin'. The user chooses a unicode language.
Admins only use functions that to not return the expected result when used on a unicode content such as substr() or strlen()

So if an admin uses my MBYTE-functions, the plugin would still work on unicode languages in both mb-string enabled and disabled systems without returning a php error, but not deliver the expected results. Most of these unexpected results nowhever apply only to places where strings are cut to a certain length or letters in a string are counted, as well as when a search is done for a short word.

So the consequences are quite small and maybe inconvenient, but do not 'break the plugin'.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 05/10/2006 07:25pm
By: LWC

Yea, I meant "break" not as in the breaking the page, just the characters themselves. I wish v1.4.1 would be officially out so your function would be "official" too (until then maybe I'll implement your idea about a local lib-mbyte or just write the system requirement is lib-mbyte from v1.4.1b since it doesn't overwrite an older version).

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 15/10/2006 11:27pm
By: Anonymous

btw. I am waiting for your input on a bunch of feature requests, bugs and patches over at sf.net for the multifaq plugin. If I do not get an input on those before 1.4.1 is out, you will have to wait for those things until I release the 2.3 of the plugin, which wont be this year for sure.

further, I would like to mention again that you are violating the GPL by continuing to distribute the Forum, File Management and Chatterblock on your site.

I do not understand why you do not simply run a search/replace on the plugin name and post it under a different name on your site if you must.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 16/10/2006 01:15pm
By: LWC

Yea, Sourceforge doesn't inform about replies so once I comment on several things inside a project it's pretty much impossible to follow constantly. I've now replied to what I found unanswered. Be sure to tell me if I missed anything.

Since it says clearly in the comments of each and every file that those are my updates to X's work (including dates), I find it hard to believe it's a violation. If only it just came down to run a search and replace. There's also database keys (especially the usage of which that's spead out) and functions' names that don't involve the plugin's name or contain just 2 letters like "cb" that probably can't be searched and replaced without breaking something. Add to that the fact that "filemgmt" and even more so "forum" are pretty generic names. That's not to say I wouldn't do it, since a new official Filemgmt came out and ignored everything I did (and what is similar was probably redone from scratch - I wonder how long it took) so looks like's there's no way out but to fork, but it takes time and you don't exactly see me spreading the news around about those new plugins (except this topic which until our discussion about MultiFAQ just strayed for useless directions) until I get them forked.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 16/10/2006 11:42pm
By: Anonymous

In case someone downloads & uses those versions on your site will have upgrade trouble as soon as you give out another version with different table names. You will have to write an upgrade software that you can save yourself if you simply take the software off your site.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 17/10/2006 11:03am
By: jmucchiello

[QUOTE BY= tokyoahead] further, I would like to mention again that you are violating the GPL by continuing to distribute the Forum, File Management and Chatterblock on your site.[/QUOTE]I'm curious about this considering just about every GL distribution and plugin violates the letter of the GPL.** How is LWC violating it moreso than the others?

** The GPL requires that you distribute the LICENSE file with every distribution package. Ironically, every php file says
// | You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License         |
// | along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation,   |
// | Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307, USA.           |
yet I have never seen the LICENSE file distributed with Geeklog.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 17/10/2006 05:32pm
By: Dirk

[QUOTE BY= jmucchiello] yet I have never seen the LICENSE file distributed with Geeklog.[/QUOTE]
There is, however, a file called "license" (all lowercase) in public_html/docs.

bye, Dirk

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 18/10/2006 01:02am
By: jmucchiello

I'm use to seeing it in the root of the tar file. Still I'm curious what LWC is doing that violates the GPL.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 18/10/2006 06:10am
By: LWC

If you read the whole topic, I'm accused of two things (sometimes at the same time) - that I take others' work and present it as my own and that I present my work as others' work. Regarding the latter, someone quoted a paragraph from the license that says one shouldn't pretend his work is actually someone else's work. This was why I've said that until I fork officially, do remember each and every file states it's an update by myself that uses the previous work of X (thus dealing with both accusations). Adding to that, "filemgmt" and especially "forum" use as generic names as they can get. I guess the real problem is the upgrade concept so when I fork you just wouldn't have your old data in the new plugin (until I add import ability).

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 18/10/2006 07:18am
By: Anonymous

I think you still misunderstood what is wrong, LWC.
I'm accused that I take others' work and present it as my own
Wrong. everybody knew that you did not take out the copyright information of the file.

I present my work as others' work
True. You did not change the names and set the version number back to 1.0. Users would download your version of the forum and think its a release from Blaine for example.

Each and every file states it's an update by myself that uses the previous work of X
Sure, as I said after the first quote, nobody doubted that. But users do rarely read the content of the files. They only compare the title of the program/script, download and install it.

"filemgmt" and especially "forum" use as generic names as they can get.
You do not have to use generic names. "google" is not a generic name. "geeklog" is not a generic name. Call it GLFiles and GLForum if you want. Finally those two plugins were the first of their kind for Geeklog, so they can have any name they want, and as generic as can be.

But this all was (as far as I can see) just a problem of you underestimating the consequences for users when there are suddenly two authors releasing plugins with the same names and similar version numbers. And this is where the GPL is in conflict with your actions. The preamble clearly states that you are expected to change the name of the software in case you redistribute it with modifications.

The point were people got mad at you was, that you, simply because you made some small changes to the code (around 1% of the code as far as I can estimate) and setup a forum, thought that the original authors would stop using their CVS/SVN systems, their forums, online help, websites, file repositories, send all their users to your site, reverse their current advances in the code to the level of the last release, take your changes blindly and accept you as the new distributor/supporter/main author of their software, on your website with political messages hey might not even agree with. All that after they have been working on those plugins for years and given support to hundreds of users. All that without you ever even talking to them about it. All that just because you thought they do not work fasst enough to met your demands.

But this is not a GPL problem. This was simply perceived as extremely arrogant.

I guess the real problem is the upgrade concept so when I fork you just wouldn't have your old data in the new plugin (until I add import ability).
Not really. The problem is that users, if you do NOT fork, will mess up their system as soon as they update your version with that of the original author. If you do fork, only you have a problem of writing a function that copies the old tables to a new name.

The biggest problem in most of these issues lies with the users. Since you did not have any users of your software (yet) except yourself, you probably did not think about them. You thought only that you wanted your register_globals off and LTR/RTL and some more add-on features. Thats also why you see only a problem in you needing to write a import script and not other users messing up their sites because you don't want to fork.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 18/10/2006 11:13am
By: LWC

I was going to quote some comments that contradicted your statement about "everybody", but if you think I changed just 1% and I don't know how you measured that, then obviously you yourself think I took credit for others' work.

Also, don't you think it's a little far fetched to conclude from the fact I set up a forum to help with the new features that I planned a new world order? When did I ever say those things that you take out of my mouth? And what do any political opinions have to do with any of this? All that's missing in your description is me sitting in my secret base petting a kitten. And no, I'm not going to comment on not trying to contact authors again as I grew tired of repeating it in vain.

So many words for no good reason. If only we concentrated half that effort to Geeklog.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 18/10/2006 11:24pm
By: Anonymous

Also, don't you think it's a little far fetched to conclude from the fact I set up a forum to help with the new features that I planned a new world order?
You set up a forum in the intent to help with the complete plugin from that time on, not only with the new features. People go for support fo plugins either to gl.net or to the plugins author site, the "official site". As you said:
My goal is for my versions to be recognized as the new official versions, and if Blaine ever adds new features, I wish he would just continue my versions.
which directly implies that your site with your forum will be the new homepage for the plugin. Its surely not the world as you claim, but quite much as expecting him to stop using his site.
And what do any political opinions have to do with any of this?
When me & Blaine, in the process mentioned above, would have started using your site, we would have to accept that the plugins are published along with your political statements (which you now removed, but were there when this thread started) on your site. This, I think is not something I would want to do as a software author. If we would want to be political, we have our own opinions, and do not want to endorse those of other people.
I'm not going to comment on not trying to contact authors
This is not about sending emails to authors to ask for fixes & features. That you did quite frequently. This is about sending a message to authors to talk about the question who is the maintainer of the plugin, who's site will be used for distribution and who will contribute to the code, who will release the "official version". That you did not, ever.
So many words for no good reason.
There is a very good reason: I want to make sure that everyone reading this thread understands the problems of the things happened and is aware that forking is the better way to go than trying to move the official version to another author. And that the user is the central point of the program and not the author. So all changes to the software, its distribution, upgrade and maintenance have to be done with the needs of the user in mind, not the author's. Otherwise one better does not publish the code, and not make a forum & answer to support requests.

Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 19/10/2006 05:21am
By: LWC

The "political messages" belong to a previous version of the site and since archiving ruins the structure of the topics, I just made them available to registered users - that was way before this topic even started.

Re: Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 23/11/2006 10:30am
By: kemal

when i installed your forum and turn back to old version my forum options giving errors. And to day i tried to install Blain's new forum v2.6 i can't upgrade. and can not showing my forum! I dont know what is the problem. But please someone help me :banghead:

Re: Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 23/11/2006 02:01pm
By: LWC

Back in September I wrote to you in the forum over there how to downgrade via PHPMyAdmin. Just run the line I gave you and the upgrade would then work.

Re: Forum v4, Filemgmt v1.6, Chatterblock v4 & MultiFAQ v3

Posted on: 25/11/2006 01:32pm
By: kemal

yes i do it you said. But my settings page not corrected!! giving errors and can not showing any option..

PHP Formatted Code
Warning: Call-time pass-by-reference has been deprecated - argument passed by value; If you would like to pass it by reference, modify the declaration of gf_RadioButtonSetting(). If you would like to enable call-time pass-by-reference, you can set allow_call_time_pass_reference to true in your INI file. However, future versions may not support this any longer. in /home/.crusader/kcellat/moderntalking.biz/mt/admin/plugins/forum/settings.php on line 213

Warning: Call-time pass-by-reference has been deprecated - argument passed by value; If you would like to pass it by reference, modify the declaration of gf_RadioButtonSetting(). If you would like to enable call-time pass-by-reference, you can set allow_call_time_pass_reference to true in your INI file. However, future versions may not support this any longer. in /home/.crusader/kcellat/moderntalking.biz/mt/admin/plugins/forum/settings.php on line 218

Warning: Call-time pass-by-reference has been deprecated - argument passed by value; If you would like to pass it by reference, modify the declaration of gf_RadioButtonSetting(). If you would like to enable call-time pass-by-reference, you can set allow_call_time_pass_reference to true in your INI file. However, future versions may not support this any longer. in /home/.crusader/kcellat/moderntalking.biz/mt/admin/plugins/forum/settings.php on line 223

Warning: Call-time pass-by-reference has been deprecated - argument passed by value; If you would like to pass it by reference, modify the declaration of gf_RadioButtonSetting(). If you would like to enable call-time pass-by-reference, you can set allow_call_time_pass_reference to true in your INI file. However, future versions may not support this any longer. in /home/.crusader/kcellat/moderntalking.biz/mt/admin/plugins/forum/settings.php on line 228


and more!! I thing there is more tables on database????

Geeklog - Forum
https://www.geeklog.net/forum/viewtopic.php?showtopic=70361