you want to, you know you do

Cheater!

now now... I haven't given up on you yet...

I hope not, because I am soooooo lonely now. :(

Not all hacks works with 3.6.0
Not-vbadvance
Not- Plaza
And one more, but i havent figure out witch one makes a conflict.

I don't use either one of those so I am 2 for 0 so far. Let's hope the one other you have it another one I don't use. ;)

Actually, no. You're the one who turned the thread into an us v. them discussion by having your hissy fit about people "complaining about every little thing."

I notice that you are allowed to complain about the graphics & styles area a few threads below, because after all, it's important to you and thus fair game. But others' complaints? Nope, not allowed, they're just +++++ing and moaning about "every little thing."

FWIW, I don't have a problem with the new 3.6 boards, since I think it's possible that new hacks may work with 3.6 but not 3.5. But for those who do have issues, I think it's valuable to hear their opinions, especially since no one here was doing so in an unhelpful or insulting manner.

We're all admins here, most of us anyway. Site Feedback is for the positives and negatives. If the negatives are currently outweighing the positives, well, that's just part of the usual cycle. Any smart admin worth the title will listen to ALL complaints, not just those from an annointed few. Some may be baseless, sure. That's not for us to decide. It's all part of the gig.

I happen to agree with you on most points.

As for the graphics section, I have backed up one lady about the graphics section in all of what... maybe 4 posts? 5 at the most. That's hardly the same thing. And FYI... all of this site is important to me, not just the graphics section. I'm an admin like most here are, so ONE section wouldn't be more important to me than another.
It just seems like every single thing that the staff does here is in the line of fire lately. New members are coming in, reading these threads and saying WTH is going on here? Some have even posted their views on what they see. Have you read them?
My post was hardly a "hissy fit"... it was my opinion.. posted and over with. Just as your post is your opinion. Have a nice day

I agree with the party saying that modifications that have been release for 3.5.x and work with 3.6 (without modification) should NOT be posted in the 3.6 forums.

It is just duplicating the same work to get extra Installs, which in my opinion is low and make a mockery of the Coders/Designers promotion system, as I assume it is an automated system and probably can not tell that the same code has been posted twice in two different places.

Coders/Designers should just put a notice in their 3.5.x modifications to say that it works with 3.6 or like hornstar1337 and Dean C said we could have a [v3.5.x/3.6] version selection in vB version when editing a modification.

I think only modifications that have had to be altered for 3.6 should be allowed in the 3.6 forums, and the rest should be removed for fairness to the other coders/designers who have not gone down that route that certain coders/designers have.

I will be doing the same once I have tested my modifications with v3.6, if they work without alteration then I will either state that is the case or use the appropriate vB version selection if it available.

Just my 2c worth to this discussion.

Please, people, lets try to keep this on subject and civil.

If your modification works in 3.6 without changes, just ask a mod to move your 3.5 thread to the 3.6 forums. If it needs fixing to work with 3.6, then fix it and request the thread be moved to the 3.6 forums.

There really is no need to make a new thread in the 3.6 forums, it hasn't changed THAT much that a second copy of the hack needs to exist. Just fix your current hacks to work with both 3.5.4 and 3.6.

Thanks,
Alan.

Personally I think the entire mod system will be filled with 'dupe' hacks because of this, hacks with only ever slightly modifications (or no modifications at all) would be counted as new hacks. If this thing goes on, the whole 'coder/designer' title system should be ditched beyond the regular titles (eg. no master/advanced) to keep that fair (thats my major gripe with this, it causes 'fake' stats which makes them misleading).

I'd rather see a mod database in which you can download different versions of the same mod for different versions of vBulletin, so instead of going to vBulletin Version -> Type -> Hack you would go to Type -> Hack -> vBulletin Version.

But then people running 3.5 will see a mod and think its 3.6 only ;).

Change is never easy. I'm sure our needs will enable us to rise to what ever ocasion we need to to do our research.

There are more important things to worry about then a duplicate post of a hack. IMO it's a nice way to archive old code for reference when postigng new code. The new code usually causes the old code zip to be removed and the reference gone which can come in handy later in some cases.

So it's all good unless the hard dirve is full?

I dont like seeing 300 new releases for a BETA, i dont know. But its a beta, I run a test board with 3.6 with a duplicate of my live 3.5 and its full of errors, so I cant upgrade my live board.

I dont see why the 3.6 mod cat was created if its just a Beta, not a final release. Its a waste of time and coding IMHO. besides, 90% of those hacks are the same as for the 3.5mod category, they only changed the "HACK NAME for vb3.6"

sounds good to me.

If a hack works for both 3.5 and 3.6 with no alterations, it somehow needs to be marked as such, perhaps "BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE"? Having a thread in multiple forums would solve this, but of course that's not as easily to accomplish. However, if there was some type of "compatiblity" marker in the version #, AND there was a full search engine for listings, this would be a good solution. Lots of coding to do though.


If a hack needs significant code changes to work w/ 3.6, then yes, it deserves to be in the 3.6 area, however it shouldn't warrant another +1 to the hack count, as it's just an upgrade. Perhaps some way to combine the install count between the hacks? Or perhaps ask people that have upgraded and are now using the 3.6 version of the hack to uninstall the old version?

Not sure how the back end works, but something that could keep track on the back end of who has installed what hack (probably just an easy SQL query on top of the current tables) and to change the install #s accordingly would be nice. An addendum for both hacks that could say something like "x # of people have upgraded this hack" would be awesome.

Quickly scanning the vbulletin.com forums I see one for 3.0, 3.5 and 3.6. Obviously the mothership views the 3.5 to 3.6 as a significant version jump as 3.0 to 3.5. ORG should too. If and when they get merged, ORG can too...

This site should follow the vbulletin.com site.

Well is anything going to be done about this?

There will be an announcement concerning this soon.

If the VB3.6 hacks use plugins, they will not work in 3.5.x and viceversa.
You will have to manually edit the plugin elements to match the new 3.6 architecture or the 3.5.x one.

are you stating that there is a significant change to the overall structure?

No, only the following line in the plugin must be adjusted for the new 3.6 plugins:
The new line should be:
in order to have the plugins working in VB3.6, the actual 3.5.x plugins will not work.

The 3.5 ones should work on 3.6 just fine without the executionorder line. I wouldn't think you would HAVE to have that line to make the plug-in work.

Shouldn't.

You can import 3.5 plugins into 3.6 fine - they get allocated a default execution order of 5.

You cannot import them the other way as a database error is generated. If you manually add the executionorder column to your 3.5 database (plugin table) then you can import 3.6 plugins into 3.5 and they will work fine (as long as the hooks exist of course, many new ones were added to 3.6).

I've come across quite a few 3.5 releases that don't work in 3.6 due to either clashes with new 3.6 functions or simply don't work. Although saying that about 60% or the ones I did try have worked fine.

This isn't anything to do with execution orders though, it's just plain and simply that the code has changed.

maybe you shouldn't have to but..... unfortunately not a single one of my hacks worked on my 3.6 test forum. I had to remove them all, one by one, to get my forum to work.

All of my products are working, although I did need to remove a few that made it to the core code.