Forum Software

[rabbit]

iago has stated that he won't update the forum to a non-release version that would potentially cause problems for a lot of users.  So, I've come to you, the users, to find out what you want.

Current Software
Pros
We've been using it for a while, so we know how it works.
It's still well supported.

Cons
The permissions are (apparently) the spawn of Satan

New Software
Pros
It's just as well supported as the current software
Many new features and fixes (like permissions - they've been cleaned up)

Cons
It's been labeled as RC for a long time

[Warrior]

Yeah, let's rest security on the shoulders of public opinion. Brilliant idea.
Except its not.

[iago]

If somebody wants to take over maintaining the server, and is willing to make a longterm commitment (including backups and such -- not a half assed attempt), I'll gladly send them the database and transfer the domain to their ownership.

If everybody prefers that I keep running the server, I'll use the software I like and upgrade when I feel comfortable with upgrading.

If you don't like the way I run the server, volunteer your time/bandwidth to host it yourself, or kindly f*** off.

[Warrior]

rabbit, these kind of threads do nothing but divide the clan.

[iago]

Also, good luck beating my vote.

[Warrior]

Yeah, iago enlisted the help of Trolls & Co.
The result? A landslide victory.

[iago]

Nah, rabbit just forgot to take into account that my vote counts for 1000000000 points. Sadly, the software could only handle the first 65000 of them.

<edit> For what it's worth, rabbit, you totally fail to mention in the question that you're asking me to install non-release software. Once it's released, I'll install it.

[rabbit]

iago told me he wouldn't do something that would affect most users.  So I figured I'd let the users voice their opinion in a poll.  I never said he had to do anything as a result of the thread, and he never said he would.  This wasn't official in any way.  Why are you being such an ass about it, Warrior?

[edit]
@iago: and we don't know when that will happen.  They've been on RC2 for a long while now.

[iago]

iago told me he wouldn't do something that would affect most users.

I said I wouldn't install non-released software (it's in the final stages of beta, which is still beta), that'll potentially affect a lot of users.

Warrior's being an ass about it because that's what he does. The irony is that, as much as I hate to say it, Warrior is the voice of reason for once.

[Warrior]

I have to look out for the best interests of my organization.

[MyndFyre]

Yeah, let's rest security on the shoulders of public opinion. Brilliant idea.
Except its not.

All OSS rests its security on the shoulders of public opinion.  In fact, I'd go so far as to say all software rests its security on the shoulders of public opinion.

[Warrior]

Yeah, let's rest security on the shoulders of public opinion. Brilliant idea.
Except its not.

All OSS rests its security on the shoulders of public opinion.  In fact, I'd go so far as to say all software rests its security on the shoulders of public opinion.

So you're in favor of a fucking poll dictating the decisions we should make regarding security? Think.
I'll say it again actually:

Think.

[iago]

To be fair, security isn't my top concern here. I'm more worried about usability, and proper migration (last thing I want to do is hose the database, or be unable to properly upgrade again down the road when 2.0 proper comes out)

[Warrior]

65,535 people think myndfyre is wrong.

[iago]

65,535 people think myndfyre is wrong.

Nono, I explained this. It's one person who gets 1,000,000,000 votes, most of which weren't counted.

I wonder, if one more person votes 'yes' does it reset to 0?

[Warrior]

iago stop making excuses for him

[MyndFyre]

So you're in favor of a fucking poll dictating the decisions we should make regarding security? Think.
I'll say it again actually:

Think.

Hm.  Let's look back here, let me load up what I said:

Yeah, let's rest security on the shoulders of public opinion. Brilliant idea.
Except its not.

All OSS rests its security on the shoulders of public opinion.  In fact, I'd go so far as to say all software rests its security on the shoulders of public opinion.

I'm looking.... looking....  Nope.  I don't see where I said "Let's use a poll to dictate the decisions regarding security."

65,535 people think myndfyre is wrong.

Wow, that poll must be off.  I voted "no."  I think it's 1 yes to 65535 no.  But apparently, 65534 people agree with me, and 1 does not, so.... I see a difference of 65533....  but not seeing how there are that many people who disagree.

[MyndFyre]

rabbit, these kind of threads do nothing but divide the clan.

BTW, everything you do does nothing but divide the clan.... so why do you care?

[Warrior]

Nope.  I don't see where I said "Let's use a poll to dictate the decisions regarding security."

Let's use a poll to dictate the decisions regarding security.

How can you be such a liar?

[Warrior]

rabbit, these kind of threads do nothing but divide the clan.

BTW, everything you do does nothing but divide the clan.... so why do you care?

BTW,
Shut the fuck up.

[iago]

Wow, that poll must be off.  I voted "no."  I think it's 1 yes to 65535 no.  But apparently, 65534 people agree with me, and 1 does not, so.... I see a difference of 65533....  but not seeing how there are that many people who disagree.

It's almost like the poll won't go over some random and arbitrary number. What a mystery!

[deadly7]

Yeah, let's rest security on the shoulders of public opinion. Brilliant idea.

I know. It's how we ended up in this Obama mess.

[Warrior]

Yeah, let's rest security on the shoulders of public opinion. Brilliant idea.

I know. It's how we ended up in this Obama mess.

It's a beautiful country we live in, where murder is illegal. Otherwise I'd fucking kill you.

[Joe]

When you drive through Wisconsin, you should pick me up.

(don't worry deadly it's a trap for warrior, i got yo back)

[Warrior]

you've barely got a brain

[deadly7]

It's a beautiful country we live in, where murder is illegal. Otherwise I'd fucking kill you.

Last I checked, we killed the damn blacks.. not killed FOR them.

you've barely got a brain

A delightful result of the Obama education stimulus.

[Warrior]

You should join Trolls & Co. I think it's a huge victory for us when the opposition becomes exactly what they're trying to fight against.

[Chavo]

If somebody wants to take over maintaining the server, and is willing to make a longterm commitment (including backups and such -- not a half assed attempt), I'll gladly send them the database and transfer the domain to their ownership.

If everybody prefers that I keep running the server, I'll use the software I like and upgrade when I feel comfortable with upgrading.

If you don't like the way I run the server, volunteer your time/bandwidth to host it yourself, or kindly f*** off.

I'm willing. 

[deadly7]

You should join Trolls & Co. I think it's a huge victory for us when the opposition becomes exactly what they're trying to fight against.

Trolls & Co. wishes it could have someone as smart as me.

[Warrior]

We actually wish you never existed, but close.

[Blaze]

65,535 people think myndfyre is wrong.

Nono, I explained this. It's one person who gets 1,000,000,000 votes, most of which weren't counted.

I wonder, if one more person votes 'yes' does it reset to 0?

Only time will tell..

[warz]

Alright. I will host the forum. I bet it'll be generally faster and more stable than the current. Send me all your codes.

[iago]

If somebody wants to take over maintaining the server, and is willing to make a longterm commitment (including backups and such -- not a half assed attempt), I'll gladly send them the database and transfer the domain to their ownership.

If everybody prefers that I keep running the server, I'll use the software I like and upgrade when I feel comfortable with upgrading.

If you don't like the way I run the server, volunteer your time/bandwidth to host it yourself, or kindly f*** off.

I'm willing. 

Let me know when it's all ready and I'll send you a dump of the database.

[iago]

So, I decided to read the SMF Dev blog today, and the latest post says that, as of about a month ago, there were 123 bugs, a few of them showstoppers, that need to be fixed before SMF2 can go live. They were hoping to have that taken care of by the end of summer.

And for what it's worth, when 2.0RC1 was released, I restored a copy of the forum database and tried to make a test site (test.x86labs.org). It failed, and I didn't bothe troubleshooting why (since it was a RC release, I didn't really see the point). I didn't talk about it at the time because I hate failing.

So yeah, I'm still hesitant about the short-term benefits of going to 2.0RC instead of waiting for a proper version to be released.

[Chavo]

A large portion of the bugs are things with the new templating engine, which we aren't even using

I'll setup a test port at x86.chavoland.com and make sure all of the mods can be updated properly and such.  I intend to have it open enough for the clan to help as they desire and then roll it live after everything is in order.

[iago]

I don't really understand what the big rush to get to 2.0 is.. I mean, we've gone 5 years on the 1.x version, and everything more or less works fine (permissions are a pain, but we don't use those much anyways). Why not wait a few more months till they decide that 2.0 is good and ready?

[Chavo]

The fact that we continually have arguments about "why can't we do this?" or "this is a pain" is the primary motivation.  You personally haven't had these complaints so it's easy to see how, from your point of view, it's no biggie and there's no rush but others of us (like myself that is used to 2.0), it's a completely unnecessary pain when the solution is there just waiting to be used

[iago]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean about continually having arguments that I haven't heard. Who's having these continual arguments, and where?

I realize that it'll be a nice change, and I'm looking forward to rolling out the proper 2.0 version when it's released, and when I can feel comfortable that it isn't going to break anything. Till then, why can't we 'suffer' with 1.x for a couple more months?

[Chavo]

You and I have discussed it (with others sometimes involved) in at least 3-4 different threads over the last few months.  I think Blaze and I had some discussion on it too when we wanted to do something that we couldn't with 1.x permissions.

If I thought that SMF2.0 would release in a few months and that we'd never have an issue again, I'd buy that argument but the reality is that SMF has a very poor track record at adhering to any type of release schedule and 6 months is more likely.  In addition, we can be pretty confident that you'll be just as stubborn with the next release that we may or may not want to adopt sooner.

[iago]

Depends what you mean by 'next release' -- I'll be willing to install 2.0 when it comes out, but not 2.0RC2 or 2.0RC3 or even 2.0RC100.

How about we make a deal, then. We'll give them 6 months (till Feb 1/2010). If 2.0 isn't fully released by then, we'll install whatever their latest RC is. Yes?

[rabbit]

You won't even update to 1.1.9 or 1.1.10.

[iago]

You won't even update to 1.1.9 or 1.1.10.

To be honest, I didn't know those existed. I don't always pay attention to versions. I have no issue installing 1.1.10.

[Chavo]

Depends what you mean by 'next release' -- I'll be willing to install 2.0 when it comes out, but not 2.0RC2 or 2.0RC3 or even 2.0RC100.

I'm talking about 2.1 or 2.5 or 3.0, you'll be slow again

How about we make a deal, then. We'll give them 6 months (till Feb 1/2010). If 2.0 isn't fully released by then, we'll install whatever their latest RC is. Yes?

Obviously we are going to have to agree to disagree on this point, but I don't see a worthy reason to wait the 6 months.

I didn't know those existed. I don't always pay attention to versions.

yet another reason

[iago]

I'm talking about 2.1 or 2.5 or 3.0, you'll be slow again

I never have an issue upgrading to stable releases.

How about we make a deal, then. We'll give them 6 months (till Feb 1/2010). If 2.0 isn't fully released by then, we'll install whatever their latest RC is. Yes?

Obviously we are going to have to agree to disagree on this point, but I don't see a worthy reason to wait the 6 months.

Because it's a non-released version. It even says on their site to use it for experimentation/testing purposes only, not for production sites.

I didn't know those existed. I don't always pay attention to versions.

yet another reason

Another reason to upgrade to a non-released version? That doesn't even make sense -- it should be a reason AGAINST installing a non-release version, if anything.

[Chavo]

I never have an issue upgrading to stable releases.

Right, I'm talking about stable non-releases again

Because it's a non-released version. It even says on their site to use it for experimentation/testing purposes only, not for production sites.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here because I've said this a number of times and it's the crux of our disagreement...SMF is abusing the RC label and it's plenty stable.  I've been running it on a production site (forum.chavoland.com) for some time.  The vast majority of bugs pertain to the new themeing/templating system because that's the major new feature of SMF.  We don't care about that, but we do care about other notable features like the improved permissions.  I don't think it's worth my time to debate this in great detail since we've talked about it before and apparently gotten nowhere.

Another reason to upgrade to a non-released version? That doesn't even make sense -- it should be a reason AGAINST installing a non-release version, if anything.

It's another reason to migrate the forum.  You acted like you were mad that people were bitching at you to upgrade and gave an ultimatum to either shutup or take over the responsibility.  I'm offering to take over the responsibility.  It's only now, after you've seen that I'm serious about it, that you've made some effort in this particular maintenance aspect (not that you were doing a poor job before..I do appreciate you hosting the site/domain, just that we obviously have had some disagreement regarding the extent of this).

[warz]

Can I motion for change to an older version of SMF? There is great debate about upgrading, but has anyone ever thought about the pros of downgrading?

[iago]

I never have an issue upgrading to stable releases.

Right, I'm talking about stable non-releases again

Because it's a non-released version. It even says on their site to use it for experimentation/testing purposes only, not for production sites.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here because I've said this a number of times and it's the crux of our disagreement...SMF is abusing the RC label and it's plenty stable.  I've been running it on a production site (forum.chavoland.com) for some time.  The vast majority of bugs pertain to the new themeing/templating system because that's the major new feature of SMF.  We don't care about that, but we do care about other notable features like the improved permissions.  I don't think it's worth my time to debate this in great detail since we've talked about it before and apparently gotten nowhere.

If the developers don't believe it's stable enough to be deployed, then I'm willing to believe them over others.

Another reason to upgrade to a non-released version? That doesn't even make sense -- it should be a reason AGAINST installing a non-release version, if anything.

It's another reason to migrate the forum.  You acted like you were mad that people were bitching at you to upgrade and gave an ultimatum to either shutup or take over the responsibility.  I'm offering to take over the responsibility.  It's only now, after you've seen that I'm serious about it, that you've made some effort in this particular maintenance aspect (not that you were doing a poor job before..I do appreciate you hosting the site/domain, just that we obviously have had some disagreement regarding the extent of this).

Mostly Rabbit, for being a jerk and him blaming everybody else for his own shortfalls.

[Lead]

This vote was rigged!

[Chavo]

If the developers don't believe it's stable enough to be deployed, then I'm willing to believe them over others.

Again, I hate getting into this since it is not the first time..
Versions numbers/releases are an exceedingly poor representation of software stability or usability.  I'm sure I don't need to point out examples here.

Mostly Rabbit, for being a jerk and him blaming everybody else for his own shortfalls.

So what's the issue? I've already demonstrated that I'm willing to do the legwork and stay in it for the long-hall.

[iago]

If the developers don't believe it's stable enough to be deployed, then I'm willing to believe them over others.

Again, I hate getting into this since it is not the first time..
Versions numbers/releases are an exceedingly poor representation of software stability or usability.  I'm sure I don't need to point out examples here.

Be that as it may, as I said, I'm going to go with the developers' advice, "Note: As this is in early beta we do not suggest running SMF 2.0 RC1.2 on a production site.".

Mostly Rabbit, for being a jerk and him blaming everybody else for his own shortfalls.

So what's the issue? I've already demonstrated that I'm willing to do the legwork and stay in it for the long-hall.

True, but after thinking about it I kinda feel bad.. on one hand, it'd be nice to move some responsibility off my server; on the other, I kind of feel like I'm giving up my responsibility, which I don't like.

In any case, like I said, I'm willing to compromise and commit to a schedule -- if they don't release 2.0 by Feb 1, I'll install whatever they have. Hell, I'll even bump the day back to Dec 1 if it'll make you happy! I just want to give them some more time to have something that *they* (as opposed to *you*) consider stable and production ready.

I realize that you consider it ready, but I still think it sounds irresponsible to install something that the developers consider "an early beta", whether or not it's mostly working. Hopefully, they're in a better position to make that call than anybody else.

When I updated to 1.10, I noticed I still have a 'x86-beta' directory where I tried to install the 2.0RC1 when it was released. Good times.

[Camel]

@iago: Am I correct in assuming that your major concern is the migration phase, and not actual production use?

If that's the case, you could snapshot the files/db and give it a shot, since rolling back is not particularly hard; and if you do encounter any hangups, then you'll have proven your point and silenced the masses.

[Chavo]

I realize that you consider it ready, but I still think it sounds irresponsible to install something that the developers consider "an early beta", whether or not it's mostly working. Hopefully, they're in a better position to make that call than anybody else.

The fact that they call it both an early beta and an RC should give a hint as to how often they update their release status and how useless their labels are

That said, I'm willing to accept your compromise date for now.

[Joe]

Depends what you mean by 'next release' -- I'll be willing to install 2.0 when it comes out, but not 2.0RC2 or 2.0RC3 or even 2.0RC100.

How about we make a deal, then. We'll give them 6 months (till Feb 1/2010). If 2.0 isn't fully released by then, we'll install whatever their latest RC is. Yes?

How about Stealthbot 2.69999 release candidate 40?

Yes -- 2.7 is coming. It has been for years.

[rabbit]

Stealthbot is made by an idiot, though.

[Joe]

Stealthbot is made by an idiot, though.

Lord, or Stealth?

Cause I've met Stealth face-to-face, and I can say he's not an idiot. He's a really cool guy.

And Lord's an ass, but not an idiot by any definition.

[Warrior]

Stealth is an ok guy, Joe vouched for him. Lol.

[Armin]

Stealthbot is made by an idiot, though.

Says the guy that deleted the entire "Member" usergroup (thousands of users) at stealthbot.net when he as an admin. I don't think Stealth ever did that.

Versions numbers/releases are an exceedingly poor representation of software stability or usability.  I'm sure I don't need to point out examples here.

Here's an extraordinary example: Exact Audio Copy. It's easily the standard for precisely ripping and burning CDs, yet it's only at V0.99 prebeta 5.

[rabbit]

Stealthbot is made by an idiot, though.

Says the guy that deleted the entire "Member" usergroup (thousands of users) at stealthbot.net when he as an admin. I don't think Stealth ever did that.

Accidentally, and I none of you idiots know that I told Stealth that I didn't know what would happen when I pushed the button (I wasn't trying to delete EVERY user), and he said do it anyway.

[Joe]

Watch out, rabbit is mad.

Seriously, didn't you just have a conditional backwards or something? Meh.

[rabbit]

Watch out, rabbit is mad.

Seriously, didn't you just have a conditional backwards or something? Meh.

I have no idea what was wrong.  And wouldn't you be mad if people kept bringing up a mistake you made 4 years ago to make a point now?  Wait, I forgot.  You sent pictures of your dick to iago.

[warz]

Watch out, rabbit is mad.

Seriously, didn't you just have a conditional backwards or something? Meh.

I have no idea what was wrong.  And wouldn't you be mad if people kept bringing up a mistake you made 4 years ago to make a point now?  Wait, I forgot.  You sent pictures of your dick to iago.

There are no mistakes when it comes to moderating a forum. And man that's so funny. I told you iago - everyone remembers your penis picture escapade. How old was Joe back then? Call Chris Hansen, somebody.