Lmao... actually i have to concentrate to spell it right, so i dont spell it Boofoo as i thought it was for as long as i can remember lol :cheeky:

I just got tired of trying to correct everyone. LOL

I remember the days very clearly when I would ask dumb questions. I even go back and read some of my old threads and say 'Geez, that was so easy. I was such a nOoB'. I will admit, a lot of my threads didn't get answered or I just couldn't understand how to do it myself.

So what did I do? Started to learn the langage myself. After a few weeks of intense reading, I began hacking my test forum. After weeks of late night hacking, and going back and forth from my PHP book, sitepoint.com, and vB.org to get some PHP question answered. I finally finished my very first official hack. That hack happens to be vBSigHosting. I was really proud of myself, and wanted to release it to the community ASAP.

I wanted to share with everyone what I've been working so hard on. So i quickly started created a readme.txt file, and started uninstalling everything and reinstalling everything over and over again on my test board. That way my instructions were flawless. After a few nights of that, I finial got to release my first hack to the vBulletin community. All the moderators here helped me so much. Stefan, Erwin, Dean, Chen, ect...

I was so proud of my first hack, it even made it in the HOTM thread. Didn't win, but I came in 3rd. I was happy for that. Not bad for my first hack. Because of that, I wanted to release more hacks, and have done just that. Now, imagine if they slapped me with a sticker stating my hack wasn't QA approved. All my hopes and pride would have been shot down and i wouldn't be releasing more hacks because of that.

No matter how friendly you tell a user that there hack isn't QA approved. It hurts deep down inside, and would stop a lot of people like myself from releasing new and approved hacks. My $0.02.

If it has security holes the current vBulletin.org rules about disabling downloads would apply ;)

Satan

* tear

Joke all you want, alot of people start out in the same fashion I did. They want something done, do it your self. Most of the time they want to share with everyone on how to do it. But when you label someones hard work as not QA approved.... Well you know the rest.. :)

Exactly - Look at some of the things I first released for vB2...

Makes me cringe sometimes, but it reminds me that I've not always had as much knowledge as I do :)

Satan

Excellent post, LW. ;)

[high]* Logikos takes a bow :p[/high]

You deserve it, sir. Hell, take another one! ;)

* hellsatan nudges LiveWire so he falls over onto his face:rolleyes:

:p

Don't encourage him boobfoo:rolleyes:

Satan

Agreed!

Everyone has to start somewhere and imposing a judgemental process to releases would simply stem the flow of new ideas coming into the community.

Plus there is the problem that no one seemed to mention. Once you get QA'ed, what about future upgrades? As soon as you update you would have to lose the status again until the qa team got around to rechecking your changes.

Far too much micro management.

Why not simply check the macks when you have time and make a post saying 'checked through the code for version 1.39833535730' and it looks great! Or make some suggestions if not. Seems more constructive and realistic.

The idea as a whole is a nice utopian one - but not dooable on a productive large scale like this.

Just another stupid remark of me: :D
Based on the title of this thread 'coding style' is always open to interpretation and taste.

There are some things how vB is coded, that i don't like, and i will never use it, i will always use my own 'style'. So i guess my (h/m/p)acks would never get the QA label. :D

But i agree that it could scare away new coders if it was implemented.

Since seemingly many of you here cannot read past the first post - I'd like ya'll to read it again.
I edited it to describe the NEW way the QA team would work.

Oh. And how come you acting like you are on one?

You are right. It should be. Because amond PHP developers, Jelsoft's code is the best.

I was actually talking about both. To help remove any excess queries or inefficiency plus help format the code the best way possible.

Not teaching. Helping with suggestions...
People learn HTML. It is not cross-browser compatible in some ways, so it makes a lot more problems than pure formatting. Yet there you are - people learn both HTML and XHTML.

You would not need to pass. Your hack will be published the same way as the ones marked by QA...

Again, the hacks that have not been perfected, will not be marked as "garbage" in any way...
If they are, then you must agree that when there is a HOTM, all the rest of the hacks is marked as garbage.

Bottom line - nobody would "approve" or not "approve" anything. Just once a code of some hack has been perfected in ITS STRUCTURE, it would be marked as being so.

There is such thing as common sense. And there are a few ways that when being followed make the code easier to read, edit and understand for the majority (except for the masochists).

But would the average person who installs the hack think a hack is less than standard just because it was labeled that way? Yes, and that would stop them from wanting to install it which would reflect back on the coder and then we have that situation to deal with.

I'm not saying it isn't a good idea on paper, but to implement it on a board such as this where we are learning and helping one another almost daily, it would do a lot more harm than good in the end. Poeples feelings are involved, too.

Out of the 15 people who replied here, only one wants this system implemented. I don't see this happening in the near future. We should just move on...

Two, TYVM :p

Jelsoft/Vbulletin is XHTLM 1.0 transitional W3C compliant and so it would make sense that any code/hack added to it should also be XHTLM 1.0 transitional W3C compliant.

Now, why CAN'T we as a community have an oversight group of advanced coders to see that the rest live up to that standard prior to posting a code?

As somone else pointed out, an open source community does it and does it well...validates each one of their hacks prior to release. They have a minimum that the hackers have to code to and if that isn't met the hack isn't passed, plain and simple. And if you know going into the process, why should it be a problem?

It's kind of like getting your DL...if you know going into the test that this is the minimum standard, and you fail to meet it, than why should it bother you to not pass? Put out a list of the minimum standard for a code for a Jelsoft hack and then put together a team of volunteers and see what happens. Just because it failed the first time doesn't mean it will fail now...MAKE IT WORK. All it takes is people who want it to work but if you are convinced it won't, then it won't.

It would also be helpful if the hacks that were updated were indicated that way...I've noticed that some listed as beta 1 are 5 pages deep and are now working on RC1.

As for quoting entire posts...that is considered rude by netiquette standards. One should only use the part of the posts that is needed to the conversation at hand.

Liz

what an intresting thread this was, why did it have to go on so long? what is it about coders and a lack of people skills ;)

first off i'd like to state that i'd much rather see a team of people validating xhtml then code and second of all i'd like to say this thread waws rather trollopish.

while in essense what's being suggested is a nice idea, theirs nothing stopping anyone from offering the author assistance via pm, do you know how much it bugs me when i have to install a hack where the existing code is like \t\t\t\t\t in on the page and then the hack is just \t if that, but go all medievil on someone because they didn't do a line break in the right place is just wrong.

it's weird as i'm one of the folks that started here unable to code and gradually got better by putting out ++++ty code. see it works like this, you set out to do something you accomplish it, people appreciate it and you try for something bigger and better, that's how coding works for me, if i hadn't put out this then i wouldn't have tried for that and if i hadn't have tried for that then i wouldn't have had to learn that and so on and so forth, now my coding style is ALOT better, though i've not managed to build anything to showcase it but being ranks off of something that i done a while ago and improved upon isn't right.

if you're going to change peoples code for them they're not going to learn, infact the only way to learn is to let them grow as a coder, so in saying that i beleive that in the same way some strive for XHTML validated or Master Coder you should have the option to strive for vB.org PHP validated, however why this couldn't be done by simply uploading something allowing it to be checked automatically i don't see why not?

in all honesty i checked so see what DV was advising and of course the brinn *cough* i mean the lack of people skills in his approach let him down, and to say that a trinary operator makes the code better than a normal conditional is ludicrous, and things like that need to be avoided.

i do wonder though, for all the people looking to take those elevated positions, how often are you found in the PHP forum helping out the coders who are begging for help? i do find it strange that everyone's so willing to criticise code yet...meh

i also thing this would be a good chance to resuggest the open source forum.

Actually i've just remembered me and when i was first coding and my personal preference was if(condition){ but i needed help quite a bit (nothing's changed there) but stefan said in order for him to read it it needed to be standardized so i had to get into if(condition)\n{ now it's my preference too, the biggest changes are made at ground level, if you're that big on standards then help the next generation to get into them.

blah blah blah, i've waffled on enough now. :)

Or just forget the { in an if statement, put it all in the 1 line and end it with a ; .

In PHP, there is more than 1 way to skin a cat. :)

The truth of the matter is that this is a good idea, and if there are people who have the time and dedication to do this, it would be great. :) I would mainly see this as a process to fix up security holes in hacks.

But it has to be a voluntary thing - maybe hackers who choose to go through this process can opt in.

We can't really force every hack author to go through this. Like I brought up earlier on, this may discourage new members from releasing hacks they cooked up late one night - it may be badly written, but it may be a great idea, and someone else who downloaded it may recode it and post it back up in the thread. :) Such a hack may not "pass" the initial review.

But really, a lot of badly written hacks, through the process of others downloading it and upgrading it, do get a lot of kinks fixed up. :) I can see the value of formalizing this - but like I said, it takes a LOT of time. :)

Besides Dark Visor, who else would have time to review the potentially thousands of hacks that will get released?

I would very much like for you to show me the thread in the PHP forum that reads "Please help me verify this segment of code conforms to vBulletin Coding Standards".
If I ever saw such a thread, I would be happy to clean up the code for the user, and also post a link to the Manual, showing him where to reference for the future. :)
As for the people saying "If you clean the code for them, they'll never learn.", I disagree. What WILL prohibit learning is no-one they look up to pointing out the flaws in their coding. I could have an user with 5 posts tell me he disagreed with my coding standards (if it weren't for the fact that I already comply to an extensive degree with the vBulletin Coding Standards ;)), and I would simply ignore him.

What's the difference between a volunteer team of members checking hacks and pointing out these flaws, or someone who actually has this as a job on this board? Nothing forces the coder to comply.

I can agree with the people saying it would be a kick to the scrotum to get your hack denied from the board, but this has already been changed in the original post, so this argument is invalid.

As for the labels, I think a newbie hack installer has a right to know if this hack has been coded as per a set of standards. This will make the user feel more secure about installing the hack, because he can be certain the odds of this hack destroying something on this board are minute.
I think we should be careful to cuddle the coders enough to put the end-user at risk.

I propose the following change to this idea:
4 levels of labels for a hack:

1. Valid - The hack complies with the vB Coding Standards both in terms of PHP and Source Code Formatting.
2. Cleared - The hack's PHP is optimised, but it has obvious flaws in Coding Style
3. Warning - Neither the hack's PHP or the hack's Coding Style complies
4. Pending - Pending evaluation (default for new hacks)

If a hacker is determined to become a part of the community, he will accept that he has to learn and not publically release 15 hacks before finally wising up his style.
There could even be a new forum where aspiring hackers can post their "raw" hacks for tips and pointers on how to optimise it and make it comply.

I just feel that I have seen too many horribly coded hacks (one of them is a major hack that is even SOLD, Darkwaltz4 will know what I'm talking about ;)).
Jelsoft creates out-of-the-box clean and fairly optimised code, they have spent many developer hours making their product more hacker friendly, something they really didn't HAVE do to, but did it anyways. Is it really fair to repay them by allowing any form of garbage (as garbage can come from experienced coders as well as newbies), degrading the performance of their product, then whine to them about how it's running slow? Hardly.

EDIT:
Extremely annoying as well, makes debugging a pain.
That's an added bonus, yes ;)
That's a good idea, but there would HAVE to be a label showing the end-user that this hack did not go through validation.
But if the author is unwilling to fix his hack even with the help of others, the end-user should be warned, IMO.
Me.

Well, before I even start posting let it be stated I am not a coder of this community ( other than HTML ) therefore I am not aware of the "coding standard" of which you speak, but if I am getting this straight you would like for a group of "advanced coders" to get together and look around and mark hacks that they believe are flawless in functionality and mark them as "perfect". Well answer me this question, What about the beginning coders? Guy comes in and makes a hack that alot of people love using, but he also sees that the hack has been up for a while and was not marked as perfect. Does this not discourage the coder? It would me! Just as boofo said it reflects back on the coder and his style of coding and discourages him, if I come to a community and release a "hack" but I am discouraged with grief of not having the right "coding format" or being "n00b" I simply wont release a hack.

The plain and simple point is, is that without coders this site would DIE..simple as that..without the volunteers among us that take there time and energy to code...this site simply would not last and we would be with default vB or we would have to code ourselves without any help from a community.

Now, I am not going to get into a "name calling" fight..but the fact that you dare come here and make many posts discouraging the members of this community is sick and wrong. hellsatan makes hacks for this site and his own, he is gracious enough to release whatever code he makes free of use and he should be thanks for that ( along with plenty of others who have done this also, boofo, livewire, danny, sabret00the...everyone ) If you have your ideas of a "perfect world" where everyone code is perfect and flawless..that is fine...make a site and charge a monthly fee for it ( cause it seems you are so set on making money I see ) But you remember that you started out somewhere also, just like everyone else. Please do not be an ass on this site, I have rarely seen you make a thread in good mind set.

That is all I have to say..and despite whatever name calling may come back up, I will not reply to it..I am just saying what I believe.

~SmallCurt

no theirs no posts that say is this valid, but their are posts that ask how do you do this? why not show them with valid code?

and with the second thing i was speaking from a personal POV i know that if you tell me my codes wrong despite it working you lose my interest where as if you play with the words and your approach it can work wonders, it's like a woman with cleavage asking for a ride compared to a headmistress looking lass.

why dog on someone because they don't meet your interpretation or what something should be? if theirs no security holes give them time to improve themselves as i assure you for everyone you get to come round to your way of thinking, you'll get another that you caused to give up.

as i said make it automated utilizing PHP and regex's or not at all, that way theirs no people involved to hurt feelings and only the people that want their hacks validated get them validated.

Quote me the post where we have mentioned money, please :)

I dont know about DV but I don't venture there much because I can rarely code off the top of my head, so it would be too much testing and hassle.
See the next point of this post.
Do you think we were going to hound them day and night, never giving them rest until they comply? Wrong. We would simply notify the coder and warn the end-user. If this discourages the coder, then that coder is a carebear and really should toughen up if he wants to survive in life. Constructive critisism is the core of all learning.

Sabe, it sure took you long enough to get involved in this thread. ;)

I'm not saying the idea isn't good, just do it without the labels. We can help one another better our coding standards without labeling them in any way. Make a forum and let people ask for help and get their code looked at and improvemenets suggested. But labelling anyone is only going to cause hurt feelings and problems.

I like the idea a Hacker can opt-in for Validation and the different levels proposed by Revan.

Count me in for the review Team ;)

how does it sit right with you that you're willing to say "you're code is ++++, fix it" but you're not willing to say "oh to do that, try this" come on, if any system like the one you're backing was put into place, i'd suggest that all 'validators' had a record or helping needy coders before they even thought about validating code.

and while you're not saying you're hounding em, didn't i read up above that you'd like to filter out un-standardized code and even possibly disallow un-standardised code? if that's not hounding people i don't know what is.

funny thing about this thread is, that i've spent most of my time the past couple weeks on a literature peer review system lol.

I was actually referring to his sig and the fact of the thread a week or 2 ago about releasing paid hacks on vbulletin.org


~Curt

i was pretending i had something better to do with my time ;)

That passes! Good job! ;)

Impossible, as you already know that will diminish the team to 0. Just because I don't spend all my time helping other people in the PHP forum, doesn't make my opinion as a validator any less valuable. I know most of the standards by heart, and code from them the best I can (Im actively refusing to capitalise 'as' in foreach() statements though :p), so in what way does the fact that Im not seen in the PHP forum make me less worthy of a Validator position?
I am quite capable of offering a segment of code recoded/optimised/cleaned up.
In fact, Im offended by the wording you are using to describe how we would do our job. In no way did we intend to call the code shide, or ORDER a coder to fix it. We would send a notice to the coder sounding like so:
Now will you please shut the **** up about the whole "your gonna rip the piss outta the hacks hence this is ++++" deal?
I doubt this is possible with regex, and we never said anything about disallowing un-compliant code. We would only disallow code that had serious flaws (such as security holes, noticeable performance drops, etc).

Passes depending on what? ;)

:p

Exactly...

Well, my coding days are over. :(

;)

Check my above post, it contains a good idea and a specification :P

1. https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showpost....0&postcount=10 (first paragraph under the second quote)

2. nah it not only does. it should be the standard that's met by validators ;)

DV hasn't seen my post, who the hell said his idea was written in stone?

i actually think it could be done but we'd need matt in here as he's handy with regex's

it's his thread, i assumed he was the idea leader.

i hope my postcount is going up for all of this :nervous: