punbb 1.3

wet · 2008-11-19 05:35:21

First questions first, please, from a forum layman: What are the reasons our PunBB doesn’t cut it anymore?

Destry · 2008-11-19 08:49:40

Good, simple question.

We are facing the same considerations here and I would honestly like to know now that Rickard has since exited the scene. Judging from the improvements in 1.3, I’d say there’s not a lot of argument for — an unnecessary — migration.

These improvements (just a few of them) look darn good to me:

One click extension installation, no need to modify forum’s code anymore
More customazable styles, templating system
New layout: markup, CSS, language files updated, markup helper functions added. (Would first like to see this “new layout”)
URL rewriting schemes, nice URL’s built-in
Split/merge topics functionality. / rubs eyes and rereads / Merge – topics – functionality !! (That’s a deal maker right there.)

Last edited by Destry (2008-11-19 08:55:05)

hcgtv · 2008-11-19 16:00:03

wet wrote:

First questions first, please, from a forum layman: What are the reasons our PunBB doesn’t cut it anymore?

You can keep running PunBB 1.2, it’s a very solid and secure code base. Though there are niceties that exist in other forums that would help the moderators do a better job.

The big thing in PunBB 1.3 is UTF8 support and Extensions. The upgrade script will convert your database, though there’s been bumps with the process, hopefully they’ll get ironed out. Extensions take away the need to mod the forum code, like Mary has done here for subforums and other enhancements.

Smartys, upon our request, added the split/merge functionality before he abruptly departed the scene. This was a feature sorely missing and from a moderator point of view, is a good reason to upgrade to 1.3. Smartys was the lead developer after Rickard left for personal reasons, Smartys may surface again some day.

There have been improvements to the styles but there is no true templating system. Paul did allude to the fact that 1.3 could be made to look like Vanilla but has yet to show me such a theme. Pun’s strength and weakness is how closely the forum’s style is embedded into the PHP code. This gives Pun it’s very fast rendering times but also handcuffs the web developer from making Pun look anything but boxy. Without a templating system, you have to delve into the PHP code to make your forum stand out, which in essence takes away from the benefits of the Extension system.

Like I said, 1.2 is solid, but whether it’s a long term option, is the question.

hcgtv · 2008-11-19 16:40:05

Bloke wrote:

That’s why I modded PunBB the way I did in that link up there; it’s BBCode out of the box/for new users, but each person had a dropdown that can be toggled between BBCode, Textile or Markdown. The admin has a global dropdown to enable/disable Textile or Markdown depending on whether they’ve installed either; the ones they haven’t enabled aren’t given as options to the users.

Quick question. How do you handle quoting? Let’s say I use BBCode and someone presses the quote link but they use Textile?

colak · 2008-11-19 16:46:47

I found Punbb 1.2.x solid until our forum was hit by a wave of bot induced registrations which were not even stopped by the email verification system.
Then we had a wave of spam posts mostly about porn sites.

With the Captia plugin now officially supported by the PunBB devs, the attacks, although still active produce no results.

Another problem i had with 1.2.x was the number of mods needed. The new pluin system looks like it will be functional and I expect a proliferation of plugins, not unlike what we have here on txp.

Although I am following the progress of flux, it is still early stages and there is no way of telling where it will go.
Rickard leaving PunBB was to be expected. Open sourse software is very much like hurdles, code changes hands and the speed is hopefully maintained.

Bloke · 2008-11-19 16:55:40

hcgtv wrote:

Quick question. How do you handle quoting?

Currently, it’d explode :-)

I figured it was kind of hard graft to be able to accurately detect which type of system a person was using simply based on the marked up content. So like a true champion when faced with adversity… I ignored it for my first-draft attempt. Which is why I never went live with the forum in the end.

However, it’s not forgotten. The simplest solution is probably — as long as there’s a hook on the Quote event; I haven’t checked — to look up the quoted user’s current markup system and render that post as HTML on the fly via TextileThis() or the BBCode/Markdown equivalent. By displaying HTML as the quoted text, everything else can continue as normal.

It ain’t foolproof (if the quoted user has changed markup systems and someone is quoting an ancient post, for example) but it’s probably good enough, short of coming up with some clever algorithm to detect a markup system from within a sea of text. If there are any theories on this, btw, I’d be most interested to hear of an approach.

hcgtv · 2008-11-19 18:11:51

Bloke wrote:

It ain’t foolproof (if the quoted user has changed markup systems and someone is quoting an ancient post, for example) but it’s probably good enough, short of coming up with some clever algorithm to detect a markup system from within a sea of text. If there are any theories on this, btw, I’d be most interested to hear of an approach.

I think you have to store, in the post record, the markup that was used at the time the post was written. Then if you quote a post that uses Textile and you’re using BBCode, the post has to be converted to BBCode markup for your ease of use.

Another option is to always store the post as BBCode, then do an on the fly conversion to Textile before displaying the post to the user. Which is what I would lean towards, since then the database sits in standard BBCode, for the ease of other extensions or conversion to another forum system.

Bloke · 2008-11-19 18:31:55

hcgtv wrote:

I think you have to store, in the post record, the markup that was used at the time the post was written.

That makes sense. Way more sensible than my crap idea!

Another option is to always store the post as BBCode, then do an on the fly conversion to Textile before displaying the post to the user.

Hmmm, makes sense from a “keeping everything pure” standpoint but holy smokes, how the hell do you implement it? A BBCode to Textile conversion algorithm is out of my league; and wouldn’t it slow down page render times an order of magnitude…? Anyway, this is probably a bit OT now, sorry for the diversion.

Last edited by Bloke (2008-11-19 18:32:09)

hcgtv · 2008-11-19 19:19:03

Bloke wrote:

A BBCode to Textile conversion algorithm is out of my league; and wouldn’t it slow down page render times an order of magnitude…?

Check out markItUp!

Mary · 2008-11-20 01:25:40

The one downside about migration to Phorum is that all topics and posts lose their original id numbers in the database, which means there’s no way to redirect users to the new url if they arrive via Google or other external sites. If we had been starting from scratch, I would have chosen Phorum. Destry may not have heard of it, but it really has been around a long time, is actively maintained, and is the forum software used by MySQL.

Upgrading to 1.3 or swapping to FluxBB is probably a workable solution to bring in some much needed moderation features, and then extensions can be worked on to bring in other stuff that’s desired, such as a per-post formatting option, like you can do in Vanilla. For that you don’t need to worry about converting anything, all you would do is keep all existing posts as Textile. When folks edit posts they could change their formatting if they so desired.

Destry · 2008-11-20 13:08:52

It sounds like punBB 1.3 it is, then. So, co-managers, what’s the next step? he-he!

I am certainly unaware of many things, Mary. That’s one great thing about being a remora around here. :)

colak · 2009-04-09 17:43:05

the recent wave of spam messages makes the upgrade to 1.3.x more urgent. The annoucement earlier today of the imminent release of 1.3.3 comes as a reminder of how behind updates in this forum have been. I know that an upgrade will not be easy as textile will need to be enabled as well as any other mods but the new version comes with a number of plugins – including subforums which might make the transition easier.

Having said that, my main concern is the continuous spam attacks which I am not sure as to how they could be resolved. A suggestion would be to allow moderators to delete posts from any forum. In this way, the spam posts will probably be deleted within minutes.

maverick · 2009-04-09 18:33:47

Agreed. The spam indicates some sort of change is needed, whether on the software side or in the moderation side.

If upgrading the software will help the moderators, that’s a huge plus and let’s do it! If making a major change is the best strategy for the future, let’s bite the bullet (does that slang communicate accurately in an international community?) and do it.

That said, I realize its easier said than done. Since modifying php likely required, and I’m not a php coder, I not much use as a volunteer. So I’ll be quiet now. :-)

els · 2009-04-09 21:31:33

colak wrote:

A suggestion would be to allow moderators to delete posts from any forum. In this way, the spam posts will probably be deleted within minutes.

That would at least be a good temporary solution. But we’d still have to report the user, because moderators can’t ban or delete users…

colak · 2009-04-10 01:58:04

Els wrote:

That would at least be a good temporary solution. But we’d still have to report the user, because moderators can’t ban or delete users…

True. One way is to provide a link to the user’s profile in a report to the admins.

Last edited by colak (2009-04-10 01:58:20)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#16 2008-11-19 05:35:21

Re: punbb 1.3

#17 2008-11-19 08:49:40

Re: punbb 1.3

#18 2008-11-19 16:00:03

Re: punbb 1.3

#19 2008-11-19 16:40:05

Re: punbb 1.3

#20 2008-11-19 16:46:47

Re: punbb 1.3

#21 2008-11-19 16:55:40

Re: punbb 1.3

#22 2008-11-19 18:11:51

Re: punbb 1.3

#23 2008-11-19 18:31:55

Re: punbb 1.3

#24 2008-11-19 19:19:03

Re: punbb 1.3

#25 2008-11-20 01:25:40

Re: punbb 1.3

#26 2008-11-20 13:08:52

Re: punbb 1.3

#27 2009-04-09 17:43:05

Re: punbb 1.3

#28 2009-04-09 18:33:47

Re: punbb 1.3

#29 2009-04-09 21:31:33

Re: punbb 1.3

#30 2009-04-10 01:58:04

Re: punbb 1.3

Board footer