A single package would be great for fresh install and upgrades, that would indeed avoid many problems.
However i'm concerned by the image and template directories in this case (uninstall/install concept) as it is one more step to backup these directories and upload them afterwards, besides i'm quite sure that because the custom template directory contain a duplicate of the plugin directory some users would end with an install using the old plugin files.

Is there any specification opened for this system ? would be interesting for everyone to discuss it before implementing it or freezing the specification.

Getting off topic but...

Why not add a simple check so that these files/directories do not get overwritten? I'm sure fxstein has already thought of that.

Lets close this for now and keep this thread to issue about this nightly build.

You will get a chance to test new functionality soon enough. Thx!

The IMG tag size issue is still there in this patched version.

Will the following fix still work (i noticed this part of the file changed a little) ?

Hmm. Interesting. Is it all the time or just for some? We have rewirtten that piece to take care of the image size issues. Let me look at that.

Hum, i have to rectify a little bit my observation, anything below size=500 or around this works and the image is well resized however any size above 500 or around doesn't increase the image size, i don't know if it's supposed to work like that but with 1.0.3 version i was able to set higher size if i remember well.

I noticed this because some pictures with text inside are now too small to read the text correctly.

grumblemarc wrote:
Rrrr.

Really, I'm not grumbling but the files you download from the SVN aren't really mean to be used as patches or fixes-only for testing on non-production sites until you are POSITIVE they work without issue. Hence no documentation.

So I would definitely get away from looking at them as fixes until they are released officially.

TWO THINGS...

First, what you folks are doing, and your approach is alright with me. You are working on it now, and its a work in progress. When its ready to go, the community can grab the release files. My gripe was that in the bugtracker it made it seem like a particular bug was FIXED because it was listed as CLOSED. In reality you guys are working on it so its not officially FIXED (just a work in progress with need to be tested fixes if any) and shouldnt be CLOSED if I understand it correctly.

LASTLY, this may or may not be something you can use... I understand the files did nothing to the database as you folks have documented. However on our website we use JACLplus for permissions. After we did the upgrade we started getting messages from users that they could not see the website forums. We as super admins saw all forums and didnt think at the time that anything was wrong. We noticed somehow the permissions had gotten hosed. All permissions in jaclplus and for the forums needed to be reset. This may or may not be of interest to you but I did want to share it. Just in case...

frodon2 wrote:
Hum, i have to rectify a little bit my observation, anything below size=500 or around this works and the image is well resized however any size above 500 or around doesn't increase the image size, i don't know if it's supposed to work like that but with 1.0.3 version i was able to set higher size if i remember well.

I noticed this because some pictures with text inside are now too small to read the text correctly.

Ahhh that explains it. As part of the fix we also added a little check to max the size of the image to the area that is specified in your configuration. Check the backend setting for FireBoard on the size of the text area for a particular post. It has a maximum width and the image size gets limited by that to avoid having huge images destroy the layout of the forum.

I am also going to do some work with the author of multithumb to better integrate it with FireBoard. When you use multithumb on top of FireBoard, these larger images will open up in a lightbox or similar once clicked on them.

Do you think that will work for you?

Eventually we might make this configurable but as we are in fixing mode, I was not able to add additional backend parameters to FireBoard.

itgl72 wrote:
grumblemarc wrote:
Rrrr.

Really, I'm not grumbling but the files you download from the SVN aren't really mean to be used as patches or fixes-only for testing on non-production sites until you are POSITIVE they work without issue. Hence no documentation.

So I would definitely get away from looking at them as fixes until they are released officially.

TWO THINGS...

First, what you folks are doing, and your approach is alright with me. You are working on it now, and its a work in progress. When its ready to go, the community can grab the release files. My gripe was that in the bugtracker it made it seem like a particular bug was FIXED because it was listed as CLOSED. In reality you guys are working on it so its not officially FIXED (just a work in progress with need to be tested fixes if any) and shouldnt be CLOSED if I understand it correctly.

LASTLY, this may or may not be something you can use... I understand the files did nothing to the database as you folks have documented. However on our website we use JACLplus for permissions. After we did the upgrade we started getting messages from users that they could not see the website forums. We as super admins saw all forums and didnt think at the time that anything was wrong. We noticed somehow the permissions had gotten hosed. All permissions in jaclplus and for the forums needed to be reset. This may or may not be of interest to you but I did want to share it. Just in case...

As for the fixed bugs. Once we have a fix that has been validated by several folks, we close the bug. It means that the latest SVN contains that fix and that it will be part of the next release that gets put together. As we coordinate multiple developers it is important for us to keep track what has been closed - even if it has not been released as part of a new version.

Have not had a chance to work with JACLplus. As it is a separate component I can't really comment on its functionality - I would not know what I am talking about. Maybe somebody else with experience in JACLplus could look into this?

fxstein wrote:
Ahhh that explains it. As part of the fix we also added a little check to max the size of the image to the area that is specified in your configuration. Check the backend setting for FireBoard on the size of the text area for a particular post. It has a maximum width and the image size gets limited by that to avoid having huge images destroy the layout of the forum.

I am also going to do some work with the author of multithumb to better integrate it with FireBoard. When you use multithumb on top of FireBoard, these larger images will open up in a lightbox or similar once clicked on them.

Do you think that will work for you?

Eventually we might make this configurable but as we are in fixing mode, I was not able to add additional backend parameters to FireBoard.Ho great concept !, it seems really good that the max image size parameter is dependent of the max textarea width. I tested and it works as described in your post.
I think this way of handling things is really an improvement as it ensure that your forum layout is not destryed by big images, it was the case in 1.0.3 on my forum and is fixed now (didn't noticed this before you told me).

The only additional thing i could see would be to make the image clickable so that the user can just click the image to see it in full size in a blank page (like when you right click on it and choose view image). Anyway i can live without, i find this new implementation way more appropriate than the previous which broke forum layout in some cases.

Thanks for the explanation and the greatr work done on this