It's also more markup when even the existing one isn't working as well as it should.
I've returned from the world of the dead, with old forgotten...suggestions! http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1109447905/l50
>-Scaleable administration (ie, [variable permissions for different passwords])
>-Forcenick and/or force anon for [specified IPs]
>>313 Like lots of people use them anyway </sarcasm>. Yes, security is a good idea. What are the holes, anyway?
/-100 shows the first post two times.
> 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.
Actually, no, the Javascript just strings some random numbers and letters together.
> 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.
But the body text is even more important, and that goes at the bottom. So I dunno.
>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.
Would it maybe make sense to make a separate thread creation page?
> The error page in mode_message should more closely resemble that of 0ch (complete with "ERROR!" title).
Signed. And the style selector on the error page is pretty useless.
>>54
I really don't understand what the problem with the current system is. You must be confused. ┐('~`;)┌
>>184
If people are going to decide to use custom names for paramaters, then there isn't much you can do about it anyway, or is there?
>>74
The comma range separator is useful for anchoring a certain post range to the first post (ie, "1,-100"), but that's all I can really think of. Still, I appreciate such a degree of flexibility.
>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.
I don't see any inconsistencies in >>341 except for the rounded corners.
(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!
>>220
I meant only using the extra post for autoclose situations where the thread has exceeded the defined postcount limit in config.pl. As for the implementation, couldn't you just have Kareha use post_stuff() and (somehow) replace the timestamp with "Over XXXX Thread"?
Well, that's what I've said from the start, but people keep requesting them.
FUDGE_BLOCKQUOTES is used by the Futaba style, and I guess I just want to keep it there to make it compatible with Futallaby-style CSS files.
Yes, it's throwing Javascript errors for me if I use that character. Gonna look into that some more.
PS: I always wanted to say this: The # anchors on the TiddlyWiki automatically scroll me (FF, 1.0.7) just below the actual text box of the entry. Is that a bug, a feature or... ?
0ch-PHP had this nifty feature where if it was a certain "high bandwidth" time of day, then you couldn't view the whole thread.
Hm... that is kind of useless on a worldwide forum, huh?
But there should still be an option to keep people from viewing more than 100-200 posts, as an emergency way of saving bandwidth.
Well, there are some issues to consider here:
In the end, people actually enjoy the 0ch quirkiness. I know I do. I know about designing good interfaces, but there's something fun about an interface that is a little bit quirky, as long as it doesn't get in your way, and these things don't.
Why would there be any use in writing actual HTML in posts? Seems to me like it's just inviting abuse.
It's also more markup when even the existing one isn't working as well as it should.
> I don't understand the argument for OH NO ANOTHER BUTTON MY WHOLE LIFE IS RUINNED crowd
It's all a design & layout question. I'd like to have the interface reduced to what is absolutely neccessary, esp. since I do not think many people really want to even bother or bother very often with the whole markup question.
> The replacement will be an option to select the default markup for a board, which makes much more sense overall.
I agree, this seems to make the most sense. I understand the "More options..." will not be showing up on boards with fixed settings, so I'll shut my mouth from now on. Apologies to all who I've been bothering.
Well, you have your chance to try and abuse it over on the test page. Although the list of allowed tags there doesn't exactly match what would be allowed here.
Also, the point is to make the type of markup selectable, so you can pick WakabaMark or HTML or none at all.
> 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.
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