>>214

Point taken. I'll add it as an autoclose option.

Getting back to inconsequential nitpicking: I find the "___ image replies omitted" phrase to be a bit redundant, and for one it confuses me as to whether or not those image replies are separate from text-only replies. How about simply calling it "images"?

Partition for renaming "WakabaMark" to "WAHaMARk"!

A 1001th post would be a bother.

PS. What's "Raw HTML"?

>>321
Wait, why should l50 links be indexed/cached? IMO the only links that should be on Google at all are main pages and "entire thread" links.

Some final points (I hope) before the whole thing is wrapped up:

• The CSS in the All threads page is unsightly. Is there a way to properly wrap the outer color border(s) around the table of threads?

• I still say that the "Navigation: " text is extraneous when people can clearly see what the links do. Also still partitioning for 0ch-style error pages (with displayed user host and all).

• Now that we do have filesize indicators in the backlog page of mode_message, do you still find it useless to have the red bold filesizes near the bottom of thread subpages?

• Does mode_message now work in PAGE_GENERATION => 'paged'?

• Idea: forced anonymous/sage/ID/fusianasan by IP/thread/board/whole site (some of these combinations already exist, I know)?

• Finally, I imagine that the permasage/close/delete functions in kareha.pl will be easily interchangeable among the conditions in post_stuff(). Can you confirm this?

> 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.

requesting features:

• >>n and >>q and anything else that can be used in the url.

• a "catalog" page for wakaba, like some futaba boards have.

> and/or let your oldtime users tell newbies.

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

>>344 orz

> 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.

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

> Does the CSS selector -really- get in your way?
> Is having the More options thing really ruining your experience,

Yes and yes and I already stated why.

I am sure you know this but text markup takes place on a whole different level than identification/bumping issues. Your comment about pgp signatures is very funny but I will not honour it with a comment.

>>123

Noted. I've been struggling with that same problem for naming things internally in the code, and obviously it distracted me from noticing the same problem in the GUI.

>>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.

>>103

Noted.

Oh okay.

I agree, for Kareha at least.

>>153

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Domain

It means anyone can do whatever they want with it. They can't claim copyright, though, since they didn't create it in the first place. They can modify it an claim copyright on their modifications, at least as long as they're significant enough, but that doesn't affect existing works in the public domain.

> This is kinda what I had pushed for earlier in >>52. I think that separating the sage (aka, "don't bump"), fusianasan (aka, "show IP"), and ID:Heaven (aka, "no ID") functions from any particular post elements in the main scripts would be ideal for implementing Kareha in systems where inputting a certain string to trigger these functions is not intuitive (ie, every board outside of the 2ch/Futaba family). These trigger strings (S_DONTBUMP, S_SHOWIP, S_NOID) and their assignment to a certain form field input could be instead implemented individually in each template.

There's no obvious way to do this, since there has to be code that specifically checks a field and takes certain actions long before the template comes into play. It'd take some sort of plugin system to implement it, and I don't think that's quite called for.

Also >>154 is Kami.

>>Well, then you are out of luck, aren't you? So you want to enter your E-Mail but cannot because then the post wouldn't bump then? Solution: Write it in the comment field, problem fixed.

There is no reason to change well-known keywords for this or even turn this into a frustratingly unconvenient tickbox/checkbox.
Having a specific trigger to trigger ID would also work.

>discussion of only one comment box, then you couldn't talk about sage/fusianasan/whatever

You could only trigger the functions in a specific format, say

:link-sage
:name-blah#faggot

lol comment

I do not believe this was an actual request, but it is obviously possible and usable. Another way would be escaping keywords that you want to post.

> partition to kill secure tripcodes

Why? If you are going to get rid of secure tripcodes you should get rid of tripcodes by the same reasons. On another note, why have I seen partition instead of petition multiple times?

>So I misspelled one word once. Sue me!

My point was that it is unnesessarily obtuse, not nit-picking that you misspelled it.

>This is a widely used system. There is a very low learning curve here. sage = does not bump thread when replying, that's all there is to know. People can then figure out why it is useful on their own.

You would think there is a low learning curve, but that is not really the case. For example, on an imageboard, what effect do you have making a sage post (with no real content) with prune oldest and a permasage limit? What about prune oldest with a permasage limit that excludes sage replies?

>trigger replacements

I'm not sure what to replace sage with, if anything. Down certainly doesn't describe it (to me it implies the reverse of age, which is not the case). don't_bump or dont_bump? show_host or show_ip works for fusianasan imo... show_ID to trigger ID?

Oops, here's the screenshot. orz

>>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

Oh, and the navigation bar on the error page should probably look like the one on the thread page.

Test with ¦

> Frankly, the combinations of many things into unrelated fields is a design flaw.

I don't think so, not in these cases. What's the alternative? Having a different field for fusianasan, a new checkbox for sage, etc.? That's just cluttering up the interface.

> What if you want to use a name/trip and fusianasan?

Then just make one post with your name/trip and one with fusianasan and let your ID show up in both.
fusiansan is just intended for rare or special cases anyway, as is the whole subject of identification on anonymous message boards.

> What if your email address contains the string 'sage'?

Huh?

> What if you want to sage a thread, but have an ID still?

Then the board has to be configurated to just do that (it already can).

> why should I have to remember something so foreign?

It's rarely needed anyway. Also, these things are pretty easy to remember. "sage" and "fusianasan" is all there is, really.

I don't see what's so bad about >>330. The alternative is to force the table to be full width, which will make it uglier (because in HTML all columns will become wider, including the skinniest ones), and harder to read.

> No need for a database, just a text file. You're right about storing IPs, though, but then how can you implement a banning system? Do you use an encrypted IP like the algorithm to generate ID codes?

Banning is done through Apache, which really makes more sense than doing it in the script. I don't want to re-invent the wheel for that.

> I mean that (for example) if I wanted to replace the permasaging function under the MAX_POSTS condition (permasage after X posts) with the thread-closing function (close after X posts), all it would require is a simple replacement of the proper function references in post_stuff(), correct?

No, they're done at different different places, because they are essentially different functions. The permasage behaviour doesn't actually permasage a thread, it only refrains from bumping it. There's no permsage flag added to the thread. The closing, on the other hand, does add a flag to the thread.

> Making "More options..." an option in the configs.
> Seems sensible, when you already have the ability to turn off WakabaMark as a board admin.

No. And I actually removed the DISABLE_WAKABAMARK option since it's no longer really needed. The replacement will be an option to select the default markup for a board, which makes much more sense overall.

>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.

>>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.

And maybe this: http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1126586277/5