> More information on the all threads page, date of the last post? file size?
That might be somewhat useful, I suppose. I'll have a look at it.
> A quote button that puts >>n and puts the post prefixed by > in the reply box
There's already a way to put in >>n. However, quoting an entire post is seldom something you want to do anyway, so I don't think that's worth cluttering up the page with a million buttons for.
> Different secret strings for different functions (e.g. one for ID generation and one for secure tripcodes)
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.
> A trigger for turning wakabamark off and one for forcing a monospace font
I've been trying to work out a more elegant solution for this.
>>152
What does that even mean? Does that mean nobody can come along and claim some sort of authorshop/copyright on Kareha or a slightly modified version of Kareha?
That is an interesting idea, and one that deserves some more thought.
On second thought, the whole search idea was pretty poor...but could you implement saging in a way that's independent of any particular post element, and is instead assigned in the individual templates?
> partition to kill secure tripcodes
signed
> add functionality for multiple uploads in one post.
I think this was decided against before.
> Red, bold thread filesizes displayed near the bottom of subpages?
I support this, especially if thread-closing by filesize should be implemented.
>> More information on the all threads page, date of the last post? file size?
Well, I had already proposed the filesize indicator in >>208, but optimally I would actually prefer that subback resemble the one in 0ch (ie, same as the main page thread list, but without CSS).
And single-post links don't include the thread's first post anyway, so there's no need for >>n. Quoting an entire post is not wise either.
>Isn't this essentially the same as saying "Please don't talk so much?"
In a sense, yes. Just like the postcount limit could be interpreted as "Please don't talk so long".
>what
main page -- 161 Name:◆WAHa.06x36:2005/10/21(Fri) 14:44 ID:Heaven
subpage -- 4 :◆WAHa.06x36:2005/10/21 14:44 ID:Heaven
Question: does Kareha have a 1001th post message like "Name: 1001:Over 1000 Thread" for when a thread exceeds its postcount limit?
>>112
We already have the ID function, so why do we need such an egregious compromise of anonymity (and security) like voluntarily exposing your own IP?
> Pruning set to furthest-back instead of oldest.
I don't like this one. You just have to continually age a topic (until it hits the permasage treshold) in order for it so survive a long time. Normal users might have good reason to ignore simply it, though...
> Size limit instead of post number limit, maybe?
Sounds good.
> I was thinking of setting the default behaviour to never permasage or close threads.
I guess I don't have a strong opinion on this one. As long as the values will be customizable, I don't really care, I suppose.
Also: I just noticed that "¦" in tripcodes will work correctly but turn into "�U" through the cookie on /soc/ but not on the sandbox.
On second thought, the whole search idea was pretty poor...but could you implement saging in a way that's independent of any particular post element, and is instead assigned in the individual templates?
(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!
Also, I forgot to mention: fusianasan works now! Put it in as your name to test it!
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.
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.
Thanks. I did it the hard way and put in the proper transformations everywhere so filenames can be kept intact, though.
Forgot this one:
The general functions of imageboards do not seem to be clear to most people that eventually come around, the influx of total newbies is still big. Many neither know what sage is, how to properly reply to threads, what tripcodes are, etc.
Because of that, I believe it would be good to include a default link at the bottom of the unordered list at the bottom of the new thread form that links to http://wakaba.c3.cx/docs/docs.html#UsersGuide
I've also had an idea swimming around: an option to only count actual thread bumps in MAX_RES (not "sage" posts). I think it would lead to making each bump more valuable so that people don't do so wastefully and unnecessarily.
>But the body text is even more important, and that goes at the bottom. So I dunno.
Yeah, I considered this too. I'm mainly suggesting for the sake of convention.
We definitely don't need a separate page for creating new threads (I get bad memories of Shiichan), mainly because it's inconvenient and requires a whole other page for something that really shouldn't. The fact that it'd be at the bottom of the board page already detracts bad posters with itchy trigger fingers. I think most of us have an "End" key on our keyboards, so we don't really have to scroll all the way down anyway. :) Really, the only issue I have with moving the post box to the bottom is that it ruins my personal visualization of new threads falling on top of the "stack of threads" and replies emerging from below the "stack of replies".
In reference to >>90, there's something I see on every 2ch board that is a lot less prevalent in Western counterparts (barring certain 4-ch boards): a rules/disclaimer block at the top, above the thread-list, with links to a newbie guide, site FAQ, and the like. Yes, it may be an annoyance to veterans, but being at the very top means it's most visible to newbies. That way, we don't get a constant influx of people wondering whether or not they need to fill in the Name and Link fields and what the hell sage and tripcodes are.
> 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.
Weird, ¦ now stays ¦.
Testing #¦ now.
testing #`¦
I hate that blue link next to the reply box! It looks ugly!
Also, there's no "Less options..."
Can't this be somewhere else but the post form?
>>336
IMO minimalist web applications like Kareha should only focus on core content/functionality and leave the inconsequential presentation options up to browser extensions so that each user can tweak them to his whim. That's why I was pushing to offload the CSS selector to an extension.
>>337
Here's a better example, I think. Even if we can't remove the excessive side borders, is there a way to at least have rounded corners?
On formatting options: I think >>338 fails to understand that leaving the formatting options up to each individual user is a good thing by all means. Besides, they are absolutely necessary to the interface and core functionality, just like the Name and URL fields are. Preview functionality, on the other hand, should be implemented in an extension.
I think the issue that people have with the formatting options is that we don't have a Japanese counterpart to blindly model it after. Since we're going at this on our own, nobody is quite sure how it should be done. I'd like to see how it turns out on mode_image (if you feel the need to include it at all). :)
>>108
I don't think that restricting specific users' posting priviliges is useful in any way except restricting them from posting.
>>108,113
"fusianasan" is for when a user wants to prove that he is posting from a certain place (like a school, a company's network or a military base).
>>112
A keyboard shortcut for "reply" in Kareha or "submit" in Wakaba would be nice to have.
You may want to consider releasing Kareha & Wakaba under some sort of license at this point, just to make sure that the scripts always stay free for people to use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_License_Types#Free_software_licenses
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft
> 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.
A better solution would be to use mod_rewrite to rewrite all /kareha.pl/$number/ links to /res/$number.html
It schould be a lot faster then running the script and the links stay the same.