In mode_image: shouldn't the board title be in <h1>, and the post headers in <h2>?

http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1114201493/l50

Or use some sort of filter to replace them characters with underscores on upload.
This offcourse for files that keep their original filename.

In mode_image: shouldn't the board title be in <h1>, and the post headers in <h2>?

>>86

>Why should it?

Because it's one of the two requirements for creating a new thread, and it's a lot more important to have a well-defined topic than to fill in your name.

>It's more convenient if you want to start a new thread, but for those who don't it's one more form to have to scroll by.

Good point.

>Any idea why?

I dunno. I guess it's just another one of Futaba's countless layout quirks.

> Another topic: since dynamic pages eat up CPU in order to rebuild pages according to URL parameters, what would be the likelihood of the current dynamic thread subpages having a significantly adverse effect in this aspect if a board were to grow to 2ch-sized proportions?

The effect would be miniscule in comparison to the huge increase in bandwidth that would result from sending the entire static thread pages.

The "entire thread" link can easily be changes to link to the files in /res/ instead of going through the script, but that would make it somewhat less convenient when you want to consturct custom URLs, so I haven't done it.

> Also, let's put out a partition to kill secure tripcodes (unless they originated from 0ch/Futaba)

Why? Even if 0ch or Futaba implemented secure tripcodes, you wouldn't get the same secure tripcode there as on another board. That's the nature of the security.

> captcha (until we find a way to implement similar functionality without requiring it in the form of a GIF/PNG image)

That's even more non-sensical. Nobody on the entire internet has figured out a reasonable way to implement captcha except by using images, and the only boards that use them are image boards where you have to load images anyway. And finally, they aren't just there to annoy you, people do actually try to flood boards, and they are stopped by the captcha.

> And is there any practical way that Kareha can be modified to run multiple (even nested) boards in a single installation?

Not without doing a lot of changes throughout the code, and not without breaking current installations.

Damn, I was about to plug >>96 when I saw you uploaded the new version. Thanks for listening WAHa, you're awesome. :D

(Does this work like rules.html in mode_image? Is the board title inserted automatically in templates.pl or is it part of that separate html file?)

Already a few nitpicks though: (1) index.html#menu and index.html#1 links should be automatically inserted to the right of the board title (or below if you're looking at it without CSS), and (2) the "Create new thread" title isn't really necessary, since the widget button already explains its function (like with the reply box).

Unrelated: in 2ch thread lists, position numbers are followed by colons, not periods.

>>41

>database redesign

You mean requiring SQL software, or just making backwards-incompatible changes that would screw up old threads?

>prevent abuse

Are you only referring to flooding and spamming, or also trolls and flamewars?

Finally, out of curiosity: how much of the functionality in the .js file do you think could be properly implemented into a new or existing perl script?

All right, new version installed. This one has a bunch of layout changes, and some big changes in the CSS, so you'll need to make sure the CSS is loaded by shift-reloading. Also, fixing all the CSS files was a huge pain in the ass. Have a look around to see if there are any obvious mistakes, but be gentle, because this has given me a headache.

Also, I couldn't be arsed to fix Amber, since it was just a joke in the first place.

>>55
I'm not complaining about the current system, just throwing around some new ideas for a change (instead of blindly following whatever new thing comes along on 2ch).

(Lots of stuff in here, click "whole post"!)

> How about listing what dmpk2k or you have done already?

Truth be told, I haven't even looked over his contributions yet. I'm doing some work on Kareha first. He did bandwidth load balancing for Wakaba across several servers, and image file archiving, at least. Plus some proxy checking and other goodies.

> Split threads and posts into separate tables. You're repeating the lasthit and parent column over and over.

Bad idea. Adds a lot of code complexity without adding any new functionality. The current solution is simple and robust.

> Automatic closing and moving of threads that do not get any activity in a certain timeframe (based on average activity frequency of the board)

This is nearly impossible to get right, and I don't think I'm going to try unless someone can think up a reliable algorithm that uses the data that is availble (not much).

> Reintroduction of "Marked for deletion (old)" (it's just handy to have that)

I tried several times, and concluded it wasn't worth the code and database overhead it would take. This feature is relatively easy to implement for Futaba-style post number limited boards (and Futaba implements it really stupidly), but it gets tricky when you have different deletion modes and want to do it right.

> Prune-limit mode that is defined by number of files or size sum of files on a board

Size limit is already implemented. I might add file limit, but I'm not sure it's all that useful, when you already have the size limit.

The rest, I agree with, and I will try to get most of it done. I'm sure there's some more stuff hidden in old threads, though!

Hmm, looks like my ISP fails at keeping my IP secret.

It's also more markup when even the existing one isn't working as well as it should.

The Futaba template is missing the "No File" checkbox next to the File field in the Post New Thread area.

>>58
Fuck you for giving me <blink>

Uh, kind of a bug. I really should fix it, but, lazy.

Also, I'd like to ask exactly how Kareha does automatically generates deletion passwords. I'm guessing it's similar if not identical to how it creates ID session codes with a user's IP.

Oh, and please bring back MAX_LINES.

>>342
Well, for example, in both forms the text labels are bolded when they shouldn't be, in Futaba and Blue Moon. If you take a look at Blue Moon, the text labels in Create new thread are larger than those in the Reply box.

How about appending an estimated (at the time of thread creation) time of pruning to the first post's header, if pruning-by-age is enabled?

>Most admins probably don't get point of the secret string anyway, and asking them to put in several is just too annoying. In retrospect, I'd like to add a second layer of hashing to these, but that'd mean breaking secure trips AGAIN.

You could take the route that MrVB (I think?) did and generate the strings on first run? openssl, /dev/random, perl's random as last resort. In almost every case you are going to get a better random string than most people will supply, and if they want to change it they can. Or only have them generated if they are not supplied.

Honestly, when people care so much about anonymity they can put up with the changes required to ensure it.

>>180

The one with encoded Javascript that makes you post with fusianasan is cute.

Tell me more about these pre-compiled binaries. I thought that was impractical...I mean, instruction set differences and so on.

>>251

Again, the list of tags allowed on that page don't correspond to what would be allowed in Kareha. Of course <img> tags wouldn't be allowed, for instance. This is just for testing the actual cleanup engine.

>>216
I remember at least one or two boards on 2ch that used it, though I can't remember which (moon language and such, you see).

I apologize for the dumb question I made at the end of >>218. I forgot that Kareha permasages (not closes) a thread after the limit is exceeded, so there's no need for a hypothetical 1001th post anyway! orz

> Making them configurable from site to site is really dumb, because it would create an unthinkable usability mess.

Why? Let people figure out things themselves, if they are so keen on changing their keywords. They can get together in their own webmaster threads and figure this out. I don't see why this should be solved here.
Of course I think this is a dumb idea in the first place. Nobody needs to know what fusianasan and sage are. Write a FAQ with two sentences about it and/or let your oldtime users tell newbies. Two frickin' words, and you people talk about it as if it were something like making up a new system of romanization!

> Then why not simply boil it all down to the comment field, with trigger strings for inputting the name, e-mail, sage, ID:Heaven, and fusianasan? You can get a lot more minimal with the current interface.

That's a bit too much. You want to talk about sage and fusianasan in the comment field, not trigger it with it.
I suspect you are joking here, though. Design is about what you can take away and still remain optimal conveniency/efficiency on the user part, not about taking as much away as you are technically capable of.

I have always found that it's more difficult than one would think to implement features that will measure "popularity" in a satisfying way that isn't open to abuse in one way or another.