>>137
I'd advocate going for a separate interface a-la Wakaba, but it might be a bit too much to do for this release.

Also, maybe Easter Eggs like the Eternal September timestamp and others (if they exist) should be documented in config.pl.

Lastly, a question: who here finds enough use in the auto-expanding comment box to justify the annoyances when you click in or out of it?

Oops, here's the screenshot. orz

>>249
<a href> opens up the possibility of using inline links, and img tags allow bandwidth leeching from other sites (plus the fact that the image itself may be unsanitary).

> The Title field should go above the Name and Link fields in 2ch mode.

Why should it?

> From every practical standpoint, the current solution in Kareha is a lot more convenient

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.

> Futaba now uses "..." instead of ">>>" to prefix repy blocks.

Any idea why?

Too late! Already released!

> Put the Entire thread link on the top of the thread, not the bottom.

Well, since the current update has removed almost all links to entire threads, I won't do THAT, but I guess a Last 50 link could be snuck in somewhere... Maybe the thread title should be an l50 link?

> forced fusianasan

that seems kind of evil.

Random post: The test thread could use some linking in the notes at the bottom (what's the common nomenclature for that one?).

Oh, and please bring back MAX_LINES.

>>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.

> I'd like to have the interface reduced to what is absolutely neccessary

That's why there is a "More options..." link, instead of putting the controls there on every single thread everywhere.

>>59-60

Details, please. Everything works for me.

Currently, pruning by age is measured from the time of the newest post in the thread, so it wouldn't really work. I'm not sure if this is the best behaviour or not, but it seems it makes more sense to kill threads nobody cares about than to kill slow-moving threads just because they get old.

>>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.

>>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.

I had a number of good old threads from this board bookmarked so I could read them later and wrap my head around their ideas, but then I lost them all in a hard drive crash (strike two, Western Digital!). I also had a number of Japanese BBS's linked from this board bookmarked so I could take a look at their software's functionality and get some other ideas.

Anyway, these are all non-template suggestions:

• Topical category metadata in new thread creation so only one instance is necessary per site (further fine-grained behavior with PATH_INFO would let you nest one category inside another and view multiple categories of threads at once).

• Thorough search functionality a-la notchan, using PATH_INFO. This might not be possible without implementing a per-post metadata system though.

• Elaborating on the above, per-post metadata for "sage" status, for future-proofing in case someone wants to remove the functionality from the e-mail field (onto a checkbox, for example).

• config.pl parameter for a generic image that takes the place of a deleted image (ie, Hello Kitty)

• Fine-grained banning options that let you choose whether or not the user is blocked from reading a board, posting to a board, or both. Another parameter defines the duration of his ban ('0' for permaban), and another defines a reason/message displayed when the user tries to access a board.

• Replace HTML error pages with dialog box equivalents using JavaScript.

• Kill user deletion. I can't see any case for when it'd have constructive uses.

• Conversion to mod_perl?

I also have an early idea swimming around in my head about only bumping threads a few positions up, instead of to the top. Another idea is actively bumping threads down, either by a few positions or to the bottom. I'm not exactly sure yet what good it'd be for.

Also...

>* I'll add thread closing to Kareha, but I was thinking of setting the default behaviour to never permasage or close threads.

I think this is ideal for the time, until we have enough statistical data to derive thorough auto-permasage and auto-delete/archive algorithms. Just add the functionality for mods to manually set these statuses, but remove the "permasage at 1000" behavior.

The standalone thumbnailer project is a great idea too. As a suggestion, how about adding functionality to also read and thumbnail document files like TXT, PDF, and DOC?

>>254

You'd be destroying the DUMB PUN!

Currently, pruning by age is measured from the time of the newest post in the thread, so it wouldn't really work. I'm not sure if this is the best behaviour or not, but it seems it makes more sense to kill threads nobody cares about than to kill slow-moving threads just because they get old.

>>354
admin.pl with a separate HTML page in ./admin (so it can be accessed simply by appending "/admin" to the board URL). It should have every possible admin feature available in kareha.pl, including rebuilding caches, modifying the spamlist, and nuking the board.

>>189

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

How about a config.pl parameter to split up thread subpages into X posts per page? The navigation links already use 100 posts per page for practically everything except "Last 50 posts".

Hmm, I just remembered: >> links would not work at all with static pages. Not good.

>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.

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.

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

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.

>>193

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

That's a cool idea, though for now it would have to be left alone if we want to keep Kareha compatible with 2ch/Futaba conventions.

>>195
Exactly. The methods and the effects of saging a thread are separate subjects.

P.S. I recently discovered "rXX-XX" for threads in /soc/. How exactly does this work? From the sound of it, it's supposed to randomize the post order, but when I hit refresh I get the same order.

>>48

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

I've been meaning to change some of the defaults away from Futaba-style to saner behaviours. Any suggestions for what to change are welcome. So far:

• Pruning set to furthest-back instead of oldest.
• Size limit instead of post number limit, maybe?
• I'll add thread closing to Kareha, but I was thinking of setting the default behaviour to never permasage or close threads.

test

>>145

>does that mean you approve of removing the style selector on subpages?

I was referring to the entire board, but as you later explained, it seems it can never be removed completely. Though removing it from subpages wouldn't be a bad idea I guess.

>Kareha has no "No File" check in the first place

That's what I thought, but then why is it in the Reply pages?

Other: Have you considered multi-page links with intervals of 100 posts at the top of subpages (ie, 1-, 101-, 201-)? Red, bold thread filesizes displayed near the bottom of subpages?

Something else to consider: separating the board description/rules template from the board- or site-wide announcements. Check out http://0ch.mine.nu/test/read.cgi/jikken/1120050851 to see what I mean.

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