Suggestion / Request

Making "More options..." an option in the configs.

Seems sensible, when you already have the ability to turn off WakabaMark as a board admin. Also, it will make me stop whining (a bit).

> What about a(n) (optional) preview page?

I've been considering that, but it's a goddamn pain to implement. It'd be pretty useful, though. Also, it could include the spell checker someone requested way back at the beginning of time.

> More information on the all threads page [...] file size?

If (optional) closing on filesize should be implemented, this would probably be a good idea.

>>157
So the functions need to be hardcoded to a post element one way or another? If I wanted to, let's say, create a template for gazo-box or Shiichan (both use checkboxes for sage), I'd need to slightly modify kareha.pl to check that new checkbox input instead of the Link string input?

An interesting limitation. Thanks for explaining.

About permasaging/deleting after a certain thread filesize is reached: would this be the same as a limit on the total number of characters in a thread? Or would we also include WakabaMark formatting, hyperlinks (including navigation), name/date/title headers, reply boxes, and non-Unicode characters in the formula?

>>158
Chances are that most if not all major/fundamental changes made to Kareha's core scripts will clash with the philosophy of most people here (including WAHa), and they won't care for them anyway. There really aren't all that many big-bang end-user features left to be implemented in Kareha before it loses its minimalist charm.

P.S. Reminder for >>85

>>54
I really don't understand what the problem with the current system is. You must be confused. ┐('～`；)┌

Oops, here's the screenshot. orz

> and/or let your oldtime users tell newbies.

Like so? http://wakaba.c3.cx/soc/kareha.pl/1124991549/7

>>46
Well, I haven't checked to see exactly where the ban functionality exists in Kareha, but my idea is something along the lines of: (1) encrypting the offender's IP, (2) writing it to a bans.txt list, and (3) writing a parameter next to the IP specifying the time when the ban should be lifted. Of course, you also need underlying code to check bans.txt every time a user tries to post or reply, and also to remove a ban entry at its specified time.

> Maybe the thread title should be an l50 link?

That's what I've been saying in >>3!

> If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

It's up to the administration of the site how to use them. I am advocating that if they are used at all (and yes, there are useful instances for this and yes, these are and should be rare) then it would be helpful to be able to differentiate between site owner/admin/supermod/mod/maid/etc

> Right, I guess it was dumb to mention 0ch/Futaba in the first place. The point is, as you said yourself, tripcodes are a gimmick, and if someone wants to maintain a persistent identity across multiple boards and sites (ie, everyone here with a tripcode), they have no choice but to use ordinary tripcodes. Secure tripcodes are useless because they limit your identity to a single board, supposing each board/site's cipher key is different -- which it should be, since that's the point of having a secure tripcode in the first place. No one should be so paranoid about a tripcode that they'd need to have a different one per board/site.

True, they're of limited usefulness, but people like admins might prefer to use them. And there are certain cases were you might use them temporarily for various purposes. I wrote the code already, so I might as well leave it in. It has some uses at least.

> Shouldn't we sacrifice some backwards compatibility for a more robust and scalable design? It might even be possible to provide an upgrade.pl for old threads.

I think I'm too lazy to do it. It's kind of hairy. Besides, as I said, you can remove a lot of the drawbacks of seprate installations by using symlinks.

Oops, forgot to link the first point to my original thread: http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1127326007

Oh, and see if dmpk2k is willing to port over the proxy detection and load-balancing/distributed server cluster functions to Kareha. Those would be neat.

> 2channel does not do this either by default. It can make browsing a bit more convenient (and I suspect dedicated 2channel browsers to insert & read these in some kind of standardized way) but I don't think that's reason enough to impose it on users by default.

whoops, I misread "postcount" as "posticon". Nevermind!

So, as Xee is almost done, and I'm mostly waiting for external contributions, I decided it was time to start working on the Legendary Next Update for Kareha and Wakaba.

Only problem is, it's been a long time, and I've forgotten most of what needs to be done. Most of it is mentioned SOMEWHERE on the board, though. So this is your chance to pipe up with your pet feature request, or if you're feeling really helpful, to dig out some old posts that mention things that need fixing.

Hop to it!

So, as Xee is almost done, and I'm mostly waiting for external contributions, I decided it was time to start working on the Legendary Next Update for Kareha and Wakaba.

Only problem is, it's been a long time, and I've forgotten most of what needs to be done. Most of it is mentioned SOMEWHERE on the board, though. So this is your chance to pipe up with your pet feature request, or if you're feeling really helpful, to dig out some old posts that mention things that need fixing.

Hop to it!

>considering the default prune behaviour of imgboards

One of the parameters Kareha uses to determine pruning is MAX_POSTS, so even if you sage a thread under this new condition, you still add to the board's total postcount and speed up the process for pruning that thread, regardless of MAX_RES. The only flew is this assumes pruning is based on thread creation date, not popularity (because someone could easily bump a shitty thread and save it from deletion).

I also agree that enabling this functionality would further make threads vulnerable to intentional bumping by trolls. I was sorta envisioning it being used in a mature community where trolling is minimal and quickly weeded out by regulars.

Here's a new idea: how about trying this in reverse? Only "sage" posts are counted in MAX_RES, in which case saging can again be used either in protest or as a courtesy to others. The only problem is that people can then freely bump threads without consequence.

Kareha:

• Conforming of navigation to 0ch standards for conveniency, efficiency, etc., i.e.
• Navigation links also at the bottom of the thread pages
• "First 100" to be replaced with "Next 100" (and "Previous 100") in thread pages
• First post always showing up, even for later quoted ranges. Currently, you can supress this on 0ch by identing "n" before the post range.
• Default l50 links in all lists

• Automated archiving, i.e.
• Automatic thread closing at a configured number of replies and/or thread size (recommended default values: 1000 posts or 512KB)
• Automatic closing and moving of threads that do not get any activity in a certain timeframe (based on average activity frequency of the board)

• Bonus features (not really important):
• Fusianasan (reveal hostname by entering fusianasan or [string] into Name field)
• Customizable Capcodes (please more than just "Admin", perhaps fancy colours)

> Maybe the thread title should be an l50 link?

That's what I've been saying in >>3!

> If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

It's up to the administration of the site how to use them. I am advocating that if they are used at all (and yes, there are useful instances for this and yes, these are and should be rare) then it would be helpful to be able to differentiate between site owner/admin/supermod/mod/maid/etc

> It's a link, it screams "Click me!".

There's something to be said about obsessive-compulsive... >.>;

> It would eliminate the concept of sageing as a protest entirely.

Except that nobody knows what's going on back-end.

I like the idea though.

From here on, this thread is about Kareha again:
↓

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? Should there be a consideration to make these pages as static as the front page?

Also, let's put out a partition to kill secure tripcodes (unless they originated from 0ch/Futaba) and captcha (until we find a way to implement similar functionality without requiring it in the form of a GIF/PNG image), and add functionality for multiple uploads in one post.

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

>>48

That is an interesting idea, and one that deserves some more thought.

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

rel=nofollow for internal links as discussed in http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1127092367/

> statically linked executable

I have to disagree with this. It should run in perl too.

• If you're running wakaba, obviously perl must be there
• Most hosts that library-poor don't provide compilers (or shell) either

>>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.

>>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.