Forums

Unfortunately no one can be told what FluxBB is - you have to see it for yourself.

You are not logged in.

#76 2015-03-26 16:01:25

Jack
Member
Registered: 2010-12-24
Posts: 485
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Dear guys. I am running an open source community, I do understand problems, issues, frustration (anyone asks, no one helps), time related concerns, and so on. But, first: I do not think it's a good move to communicate the changing of the name of a software from a day to another. There are people who bought web domains with that name in it. There are people who spent time on the forum. They consider the project part of their lives. Are they wrong? Probably, but this is how open source projects work. Saying that fluxbb developers don't owe anything to the community is true but deeply short-sighted. Any community will die if managed this way.

Franz: I do deeply understand your position and partial frustration, and actually envy your optimism in front of some fairly aggressive messages. smile Don't know anything about larvel, don't know anything about Flarum. I have given to Flux what I was able to give in these years. But I am definitely worried, because I don't like almost anything of what I see there. You have a big worthy project (you can even use it as a strong reference for you work! smile ), and a loyal community that waited years (!) for a 2.0 version. Don't throw it all away, this is my only suggestion. wink BTW, technically, I definitely quote Gamezoo above.

Oh, and welcome to Toby. Hey you, don't try to touch FluxBB with all those bloated JS, eh!!! big_smile big_smile

Good luck guys, we may stay here, we may not. It depends on what you'll do. I am worried and will start to look around, sadly.
J

Last edited by Jack (2015-03-26 16:07:56)


Sorry I don't speak English smile
FluxBB Italy

Offline

#77 2015-03-26 16:30:52

Omcon
New member
Registered: 2015-03-26
Posts: 1

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Franz was pretty clear: FluxBB 2.0 is Flarum. Get over it. And no, the chair does not seem to be free to take over. Period. You should follow Ron's advice and stop embarrassing yourself any further.

Well...
It's released under GNU v2, so should a person want to take over development and diverge from the planned 2.0 they can.
If the community wants to follow they can do so.

But - from what I've read there are several things to be considered.

Change is a big thing. Changing to be more like social media (Facebook, Twitter) I would consider a bad thing. Forums are indispensable for archiving ideas and knowledge. Social media is great for staying up to date, but really bad at archiving. I had a school class use facebook to keep track of school work and such. It turned out to be rather horrible at doing exactly that.
The way flarum currently looks - it gives me that impression and is off putting.

Also, this forum was very easy to install. Will it be as  easy  with 2.0 based on a different engine? Can I copy it over, change a few permissions and run the install script and be done with it (to get started)?

Privacy is becoming (and is) a important issue in the last few years, so privacy and security should be considered at every level.

I wonder why nobody wanted to do so before this announcement. I was basically working on this on my own.

This shouldn't be a big surprise. I just recently stumbled upon it and I really like it and from what I'm reading it's one of the best ones. When it's so good, why put in a lot of work to fix it? By announcing a change the risk of losing it is greater - provoking a desire to keep it around. (Loss aversion). That doesn't mean people shouldn't be helping and this would be a great time for people to come together and help make sure everyone is accommodated.

Infighting doesn't really lead to anything good. As libreoffice / openoffice and ffmpeg / avconv have demonstrated, it just leads to a lot of duplicating work.

I should note a featureful forum that gives the eye candy of social media while maintaining the archiveability of information (latter being the truly important one) while being easy to install is needed.

Essentially, I think if 2.0 can focus on being a good minimalist backend with fairly simple to develop front-ends, I think everyone could win. Based on what I read from Flarum, that seems to be a focus - which is good

What if we were to take all of that bloat and complexity away?
...
The Flarum core is the lowest common denominator of forum features. It’s a Lego baseplate, ready for a bunch of extensions to be stacked on top of it.

It would be even more amazing if you could switch between varying front-ends per client preference.
I also think that a separate legacy version should be kept around. Franz hinted at this but it should be considered as a long term one rather then something to eventually discard. No more features - but occasional bug fixes. There's nothing wrong with keeping a forum around that is well-regarded and a lot of people are saying should be kept as is. It seems pretty much complete to me. Maybe rename it to FluxBB Legacy.

Last edited by Omcon (2015-03-26 16:44:17)

Offline

#78 2015-03-26 16:43:51

Hungmi
FluxBB Donor
Registered: 2010-08-04
Posts: 19
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Omcon wrote:

Forums are indispensable for archiving ideas and knowledge. Social media is great for staying up to date, but really bad at archiving.

+1

Offline

#79 2015-03-26 16:54:00

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,661
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Welcome @Omcon to this forum and thanks for the constructive arguments. smile

Omcon wrote:

Change is a big thing. Changing to be more like social media (Facebook, Twitter) I would consider a bad thing. Forums are indispensable for archiving ideas and knowledge. Social media is great for staying up to date, but really bad at archiving. I had a school class use facebook to keep track of school work and such. It turned out to be rather horrible at doing exactly that.
The way flarum currently looks - it gives me that impression and is off putting.

You should not base your opinion on the demo, it lacks features. Categories will be a first-class citizen (possibly as a bundled official extension), so a classical forum structure such as the one that ships with FluxBB will be supported.

Omcon wrote:

Also, this forum was very easy to install. Will it be as  easy  with 2.0 based on a different engine? Can I copy it over, change a few permissions and run the install script and be done with it (to get started)?

The plan is to have a one-file installer that takes care of downloading everything else.

Omcon wrote:

Privacy is becoming (and is) a important issue in the last few years, so privacy and security should be considered at every level.

Yup, and that's actually an argument for things like Laravel (components). It's a battle-tested framework that is used far more than FluxBB. Its object-oriented design also makes security measures easier to implement, because it only needs to be done in very few places (separation of concerns).

Omcon wrote:

I should note a featureful forum that gives the eye candy of social media while maintaining the archiveability of information (latter being the truly important one) while being easy to install is needed.

Featureful: well, most of them will probably be provided by extensions.
Social media: I think people are mostly mixing that up with JavaScript, which we're using to improve the interaction with the software, not to have an endless stream of new input that begs for your attention.
Archiveability: I agree that this is important and I think this might be where the alternative frontends may come into play. More importantly, though, we will have serve static HTML with all the important content for most URLs. (See the <noscript> discussion earlier in this thread.)
Installation: See above.

Omcon wrote:

I also think that a separate legacy version should be kept around. Franz hinted at this but it should be considered as a long term one rather then something to eventually discard. No more features - but occasional bug fixes. There's nothing wrong with keeping a forum around that is well-regarded and a lot of people are saying should be kept as is. It seems pretty much complete to me. Maybe rename it to FluxBB Legacy.

Or v1.6? I encourage you to participate in the discussion in that topic.


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

#80 2015-03-26 18:46:04

Askelon
Member
From: Bretagne − France
Registered: 2010-06-09
Posts: 202
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Franz wrote:

Social media: I think people are mostly mixing that up with JavaScript, which we're using to improve the interaction with the software, not to have an endless stream of new input that begs for your attention.

True that. Just take the WordPress dashboard for instance, it tends to use more and more JavaScript with each new update, and that's true that some full-JS features are not indispensable. But in the other hand it provides an awesome media manager and post editor with a lot of very useful features, all using Backbone.

I think most people here, including me to a certain proportion, are opposed to the JS-bloated interface like Twitter of Facebook. But past the initial reject, there are a lot of possibilities to implement. I've been dreaming for years about a notification system that let you know, when browsing a forum, that someone mentioned you, kinda like what you have on Twitter in the bottom-right of the screen. That's just not possible without JavaScript, yet it would save me a lot of time.

That's just an example, but these are things that should be considered seriously. If Flarum comes to be a strong forum core/API giving the liberty to complete change the fronted easily, well I think we'll have something that meets the old'breed expectations as well as every 2015-users would like to have in terms of features.

Offline

#81 2015-03-26 19:02:50

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,661
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Askelon wrote:

I've been dreaming for years about a notification system that let you know, when browsing a forum, that someone mentioned you, kinda like what you have on Twitter in the bottom-right of the screen. That's just not possible without JavaScript, yet it would save me a lot of time.

Very good example. smile That will happen.


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

#82 2015-03-27 19:54:06

cyberman
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-01-11
Posts: 297
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Askelon wrote:

Franz was pretty clear: FluxBB 2.0 is Flarum.

Jack wrote:

I do not think it's a good move to communicate the changing of the name of a software from a day to another. There are people who bought web domains with that name in it. There are people who spent time on the forum. They consider the project part of their lives.

It seems to me the discussion is mainly releated to the frontend .

So when I read these two comments, I suddenly had an idea I think that would make both sides happy. Maybe we should make a look to the car industry.

An example to elucidate - my favorite (dream) car is a Toyota GT 86 (a sports car). The same car is sold by Subaru as Subaru BRZ. They are completely identical.

But I'm dreamin' only of a Toyota (=FluxBB), not of a Subaru (=Flarum). Dont know why - maybe I have a special feeling with Toyota/FluxBB, but I want only this.

There are some more examples (Toyota Aygo, Peugeot 106, Citroen C1) - they are identical too, but I would never buy a Peugeot or a Citroen.

Are you know now what I mean?

FluxBB 2 should be Flarum with a little bit old school (FluxBB related) layout in frontend, and Flarum should be FluxBB 2 with a modern layout in frontend. The same system, only a different face. Don't let die the names FluxBB or Flarum. Think there could be two (good) communities too.

What do you say?

Last edited by cyberman (2015-03-27 19:56:08)

Offline

#83 2015-03-27 20:04:40

DenisVS
Member
Registered: 2015-03-20
Posts: 26

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

cyberman, interesting idea.
We can make a unified systems with a common core and plugins/addons.

Last edited by DenisVS (2015-03-27 20:05:25)

Offline

#84 2015-03-27 20:09:19

Gil
Member
From: France
Registered: 2008-05-10
Posts: 175

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

cyberman wrote:

FluxBB 2 should be Flarum with a little bit old school (FluxBB related) layout in frontend, and Flarum should be FluxBB 2 with a modern layout in frontend. The same system, only a different face. Don't let die the names FluxBB or Flarum. Think there could be two (good) communities too.

What do you say?

Maybe that it was already proposed some times in this thread tongue (and nearly agreed; at least having an architecture that allow and make easier developing different frontends)

To FlaFlux's team: the database structures are pretty different today: what's the road for a single structure?

Last edited by Gil (2015-03-27 20:11:47)

Offline

#85 2015-03-27 20:44:45

cyberman
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-01-11
Posts: 297
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Gil wrote:

Maybe that it was already proposed some times in this thread tongue (and nearly agreed; at least having an architecture that allow and make easier developing different frontends)

But maybe have no one said it in no uncertain terms big_smile.

Last edited by cyberman (2015-03-27 21:05:08)

Offline

#86 2015-03-28 00:10:54

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,661
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

This whole announcement would have been so much more fun if posted on April 1st. smile


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

#87 2015-03-28 02:09:30

qie1
Member
Registered: 2010-06-29
Posts: 24

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

i don't agree some posts' opinion. and i support Franz. anyway i wanna change my forum to Flarum when it comes out but i don't know how to convert my fluxbb data, then i got to see this announcement,so that's very happy for me to get this message .

and i really wanna Fluxbb2.0 went to Flarum , since there comes with an update for my Fluxbb1.5.8 to Flarum,I will do this update ASAP.

Offline

#88 2015-03-28 15:32:48

adaur
Developer
From: France
Registered: 2010-01-07
Posts: 843
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Hi there,

I know I'm not as active as I used to, because of my studies. I'd like to contribute more, however I can't for the moment; I'm not the most legitimate to join the debate but it seems others much less legitimate folks have joined, so here I am.

For me, this announcement is a nonsense. Reading your post feels like a travel back in time; I'm afraid FluxBB hasn't moved on since its creation. After all, what has been accomplished since the fork from PunBB? A try to release an innovative 2.0, abandonned, then a restyling of 1.2, the 1.4, then minor updates until 1.5.

Meanwhile, the 2.0 was almost abandonned until Franz started to work on it with Laravel. Nobody has the right to blame you, Franz, since you're the only one remaining active on the project. I deeply regret that talented developers like Reines or Smartys have left the boat without reason.

This Flarum thing would the the 3rd try to code a FluxBB 2.0; in other words, FluxBB 2.0 looks more and more like an oasis in the desert. You had a good start with Laravel, don't start over and over again, or people will leave - that has already started. I'm saddened that FluxBB, which was ambitious when created, hasn't evolved since 2008. 7 years track standing, that's huge on the internet. Think about it: 7 years ago, Android made his debut, XenForo was first published in 2010. Meanwhile, FluxBB is doing... not much.

I wasn't very enthusiast about FluxBB 2.0 being based on Laravel, but I came to accept it. I even started to learn some things about the framework, to be able to work on it when I'll have time (probably this summer). I'm sure your choice to use Laravel was dictated by a desire to code faster; however you didn't realize a lot of developers such as me had no time to learn properly how to use the framework, hence our lack of motivation (I think this is the case for quy, Visman, daris, maybe Reines or Smartys).

But this Flarum-thing is an aberration to me. Honestly, from what I've seen, Flarum is the typical web 2.0 "social" launched by Facebook and Twitter. It is doesn't even look like a forum and is based on a JS framework! Even if the core is separated from the JS part, I don't see how we could reassemble those two projects, how can you decently try to code something fast using two different frameworks? Over the years, FluxBB's philosophy - or at least as I see it - has been to propose a lightweight, simple, clean and easy to modify bulletin board. Merging FluxBB and Flarum is an illusion: it is not a merge, it is a death sentence for FluxBB (i.e your post saying "Flarum is FluxBB 2.0").

Sorry Franz, I don't want to be part of FlaFlux 2.0. I just want a simple, quick and reliable pure-PHP based BB script. In other words, I want the actual FluxBB script to evolve to something more modern, with PDO, hooks and a MVC architecture. Something like Visman has posted (FluxBB PE, which is unfortunately abandonned at the moment).

Someone here said forking is the right thing to do when a project you love doesn't suit you anymore; I'll probably start a fork based on FluxBB 1.5 this summer, which would bring some modernity to FluxBB without altering its first goal: cleanliness, simplicity, speedness, "minimalistic-ness". You'll be free to join and you'll get a warm welcome smile.

Cheers,

adaur

PS: Eric, your attempts to take over FluxBB are laughable, don't attack Franz personally. He's the only one trying to do something with FluxBB at the moment, while you haven't done much for the community. Please excuse my poor english - that's the best I can do smile

Last edited by adaur (2015-03-28 15:56:18)


FeatherBB - A simple and lightweight new generation forum system
Based on FluxBB, written in PHP, using Slim Framework for a proper OOP-MVC architecture.

Offline

#89 2015-03-28 15:51:26

MMW
Member
Registered: 2013-03-17
Posts: 6

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Franz wrote:

So here's the idea: instead of forking FluxBB and needlessly replicating that back-end, let's all team up and make an amazing forum software core/API. On top of that core, Toby and I will be continuing to build Flarum's Ember.js front-end. If that's not for you, why not get together, as a community, and build that traditional front-end package on top of the core at the same time?

This looks great at first sight, but I doubt it's that easy. This certainly requires a well-thought plan with predefined APIs and a clean separation of concerns. Is there some sort of spec?

Offline

#90 2015-03-28 16:07:49

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,661
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

adaur wrote:

This Flarum thing would the the 3rd try to code a FluxBB 2.0; in other words, FluxBB 2.0 looks more and more like an oasis in the desert. You had a good start with Laravel, don't start over and over again, or people will leave - that has already started. I'm saddened that FluxBB, which was ambitious when created, hasn't evolved since 2008. 7 years track standing, that's huge on the internet. Think about it: 7 years ago, Android made his debut, XenForo was first published in 2010. Meanwhile, FluxBB is doing... not much.

I feel your pain. It's not like starting over, though: Flarum's backend (which is written using Laravel, too) was at about the same stage that FluxBB 2.0 was at, and very similar in terms of architecture, so we're not using much. I made this decision primarily because the two projects are quite similar and because it felt like the only sane way to finish a project of this size soon.

adaur wrote:

Flarum is the typical web 2.0 "social" launched by Facebook and Twitter. It is doesn't even look like a forum and is based on a JS framework! Even if the core is separated from the JS part, I don't see how we could reassemble those two projects, how can you decently try to code something fast using two different frameworks?

Don't base your decision on the early demo. We know that categories etc. are much-wanted, and they will be implemented.

adaur wrote:

Someone here said forking is the right thing to do when a project you love doesn't suit you anymore; I'll probably start a fork based on FluxBB 1.5 this summer, which would bring some modernity to FluxBB without altering its first goal: cleanliness, simplicity, speedness, "minimalistic-ness". You'll be free to join and you'll get a warm welcome smile.

You might not need to go for a full fork, take a look at this topic please.

MMW wrote:
Franz wrote:

So here's the idea: instead of forking FluxBB and needlessly replicating that back-end, let's all team up and make an amazing forum software core/API. On top of that core, Toby and I will be continuing to build Flarum's Ember.js front-end. If that's not for you, why not get together, as a community, and build that traditional front-end package on top of the core at the same time?

This looks great at first sight, but I doubt it's that easy. This certainly requires a well-thought plan with predefined APIs and a clean separation of concerns. Is there some sort of spec?

Yeah, it's likely not simple, mostly due to compatibility issues between extensions. It's still possible and something we want to keep in mind - the best place to discuss these issues is probably the Flarum development forum.


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

#91 2015-03-28 16:14:43

adaur
Developer
From: France
Registered: 2010-01-07
Posts: 843
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

You might not need to go for a full fork, take a look at this topic please.

Implementing hooks, PDO, a bit of MVC and a major refactor would break all the current mods and would be a 2.0, not a 1.6 IMO. Besides, bringing (only) hooks or refactor the code in v1.6 wouldn't make sense anymore since all modifications would be broken and their developers have left the ship. All the time spent on this version would be wasted as soon as the 2.0 (Flarum) is out.


FeatherBB - A simple and lightweight new generation forum system
Based on FluxBB, written in PHP, using Slim Framework for a proper OOP-MVC architecture.

Offline

#92 2015-03-28 16:19:29

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,661
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

I disagree. If people want to keep this version alive, that will be possible, if there's enough support.


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

#93 2015-03-28 17:10:42

quy
Administrator
From: California
Registered: 2008-05-09
Posts: 926

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Besides, bringing (only) hooks or refactor the code in v1.6 wouldn't make sense anymore since all modifications would be broken and their developers have left the ship. All the time spent on this version would be wasted as soon as the 2.0 (Flarum) is out.

I disagree thus my post for v1.6. The active developers will likely update their mods. The inactive developers have abandoned their mods already so new version(s) will not matter to them. Besides, we don't have stats on how many of these mods are being used. Perhaps, some of these mods can be incorporated into v1.6 thus making them obsolete. If not, maybe other developers will convert them if there is a high demand for them.

My board is too modified to make the leap to Flarum anytime soon so I welcome for v1.6 smile.

PS: I don't see big boards jumping ship quickly either if ever, thus the need for versions < 2.0.

Last edited by quy (2015-03-28 17:35:55)

Offline

#94 2015-03-29 22:19:35

Jérémie
Member
From: France
Registered: 2008-04-30
Posts: 629
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

tobscure wrote:

- Flarum’s JavaScript assets, when minified and gzipped, will be hopefully no more than about 400 kB. On a modern Internet connection, that’s less than a second of download time

Holy sweet mother of code. 400kB?! And that's "hopefully", and just the core without the basic feature extensions?

One second download? And how much actual loading? I think you have a very idealist, if not naive vision of the internet. Not everyone lives in a city in a “developed” country you know.

By the way, even on my 40Mb/s internet connexion and 3ghz quad core, I can see right in front on my eyes when I use or simply connect to a Pun/FluxBB forum or when it's a IPB, vB or other pseudo-modern software.

What seems to be described here is at least a megabyte or two of loading and a lot of computing and onLoad time (or whatever it's called), and that's before the admin put up several megabytes of cat pictures in the background…

If your goal is to release stable in two to three years, you should test the software (with all the basic features 90% of people want) on a current 80€ (without any special deal) smartphone; if you can detect or feel or see any kind of hog, lag, anything slow, it should go back on the design table.

Flarum will be fully SEO compatible: A static SEO-optimized HTML version of the page will be served up within <noscript> tags. Text/non-JS browsers will also be able to digest this content.

That doesn't bode well. How about a mobile version? And a TV version for those browsing from the couch? And a silverlight version? And a 4K version, that's the future. And a portrait version, for those idiots who put their telephone sideways? wink

I was cautiously semi enthusiastic before reading that. I'm really worried now.

I understand that this overall “futuristic” vision is not for everyone.

It's more about the definition of the future. I made my peace with Javascript being an integral part of the future of the web. But FluxBB was PunBB without Informer, and PunBB philosophy was less is more (which by the way, is also the school of thought of all the great designers). Flarum seems to go the opposite way. Closer to vBulletin than PunBB.

I do hope I'm wrong thought.

Last edited by Jérémie (2015-03-29 22:31:22)

Offline

#95 2015-03-29 22:25:57

Jérémie
Member
From: France
Registered: 2008-04-30
Posts: 629
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

adaur wrote:

I deeply regret that talented developers like Reines or Smartys have left the boat without reason.

Oh, they had reasons. As had many other people in the community, css guru, evangelists, translators, thorough bug testers, and so on.

Offline

#96 2015-03-30 06:44:04

GWR
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-08-06
Posts: 206

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

And a portrait version, for those idiots who put their telephone sideways?

I guess you are talking about the landscape mode.
I am one of these "landscape mode" readers when it comes to eg. ebooks. Why? For longer texts I find it preferrable to have longer lines to read (less strain to the eyes).
This is a design aspect similar to whitespace.

Whitespace is something the flarum design offers "too much" (imho!). You feel kind of "lost". There is reason to have whitespace between content blocks. But the crucial part is "how much".

Such things are of course better handed of to "css gurus" which have to be attracted by the ones doing a software script. Franz now tried to collaborate with one who is actively doing views-work. But as some (myself including) pointed out, Toby does a bit too much of "js" and the likes.
Franz then talked about having multiple layers on top of the core, the "modern" one and the "classic approach". But this means, that the "classic approach" relies on "old habbits" too (regarding whitespace, responsive designs, ...).

I think such thoughts about design are worth a new thread then to layout everything properly before advancing in development. I also wonder why they use the flarum-boards for such a thing, like said they are more "social media"-like. Would you like to discuss your future plans on a facebook page?
Even the fluxbb-variant is not the best option of all (threaded boards would work well in that scenario).

Back to whitespace/design/...
Fluxbb needs some theme-maintainers providing just a few (not more than a handful) of perfectly integrated base themes. Not all of them should work well on all devices. Why? There are boards which just do not work on small devices because of the content they provide (image boards) - on mobile devices the software begins to stutter way earlier with many images, there is up to no real usecase for such boards on mobile devices. So design should be done there with "tablets" at minimum device size.
On the other hand there might be boards which are designed for absolutely small devices: if you develop for African tribe villages you only have old devices, small devices etc - so you would care for this in your theme.

I might be wrong with my thoughts about this, but I hope you understand that many of these small pieces have to be put together to form something useful and "future proof".

The current situation is surely "from coders, for coders"... not the most ideal solution (albeit "corewise" it is a good thing to be distinct from the early wordpress-releases big_smile).


bye
Ron

Offline

#97 2015-03-30 20:06:55

Weks
Member
Registered: 2015-03-30
Posts: 10

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

(Sorry for my bad english)
I'm creating a community with fluxbb actually, the question is: How fluxbb will be in the futur ?
I want to keep the "forum" structure like now, (like phpbb, etc.), if the futur update change the structure into esoTalk/vanilla forum structure, i will be really disappointed, i think now, fluxbb can be the better forum cms, but not in this way....

Offline

#98 2015-03-30 22:11:40

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,661
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Two of the biggest critiques I've heard so far: performance (lots of JavaScript) and forum structure. We will pay attention to both issues.

Flarum will be flexible enough to support a category structure like FluxBB.
We will make sure that Flarum will feel fast. There's some fancy stuff that can be done with loading JavaScript code after the page is rendered etc.


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

#99 2015-03-30 22:21:57

Weks
Member
Registered: 2015-03-30
Posts: 10

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

But ... our FluxBB with mods will receive the update "Flamur"?

Offline

#100 2015-03-31 15:15:18

mexandre
Member
From: Lyon
Registered: 2011-02-01
Posts: 29
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Hi everyone,
Franz, you have my support by following that track. Fluxbb is becoming old, not very updated for smartphones. So I understand your choice and hope that we will have what is expected now for a multi device forum.

Anyway, don't forget some cool features, especially in the editing part for users and a social network connection.

Keep on the good work, at least, you will have one person using it smile

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB