Alright, on the other topic. I know it's been debated in the past but now vBulletin has kind of layed it out for us. Will 'hacks' now be known as plugins? Will we be moved in that direction of naming? I'm just curious on this, it means nothing other than to satisfy my curiousity.

[removed: none of my business really]

from what we saw the current trend was that everyone hacked their betas anyway, we all knew that if you hack a beta you can't go to vb.com and ask for support and we acknowledged that when we made the mods, infact i'm pretty sure that a few people released betas as rc1 hacks as soon as it was allowed, saying that it's a half version not a full version, i see no reason not to allow users to share the modifications they'll make, vb.org is supposed to be about the user not the product (which vb.com is) penalising the user is rather pointless, if someone made it and they wanna share it, why should you say no? as i said theirs a vast difference from 2.2.x -> 3.0 and 3.0.x -> 3.5. it's even been said over at vb.com that it's likely to be minimal code changes as in find/replace for making 3.0 hacks 3.5 compatible.

Could you link me to the post where that was said?

PS I hope your bad day will be over tomorrow again.

http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showp...&postcount=458 in reference too http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showp...&postcount=457

Sorry but they are saying "most", so not all can be handled by find/replace. And there is no mention of "minimal code changes".

Edit: If this was true, then it would defeat one of the major new features of vB3.5.

One of the new features of vB3.5 will be that Hacks can more easily plugin instead of needing a lot of editing in original source files. If hacks could be ported with just a find/replace, that would mean that these hacks are still doing all those code edits. That would be against the new setup of vB3.5

don't shoot the messenger :p
i myself seldom install hacks that need alot of source code editing, however the ones i have installed that have needed that are of no major issue.

i.e. i wouldn't mind if they were hacked or plugged in. all in all it's no skin off my nose what method someone uses to upgrade their hacks as long as it works, most of the more vital hacks installed on my board are more of a matter of one or two source code edits or simple slipping in a directory and plugging and playing anyway.

my personal suggestion would be to split the forums and/or have another hack install button called plug in install, that way it's easy to differentiate between source code mod hacks and plug in hacks.

but hey at this time it's all speculation and with a dev saying it's find/replace i'm looking forward to the easy life. :nervous:

Personally, I think hacks using the new plugin structure (and have no file edits) should be allowed for 3.5, however hacks with file edits should not be allowed until an RC at the earliest. Gah, we need new terminology.

Anything that requires file edits I think should remain named hacks. Anything that will work with no file edits should be called plugins. There should be two different forums (when this happens, in my opinion) where people can release each of the different types. I'm sure some people will just quit installing some of the hacks that require file edits and only use the ones that use plugins so just to keep it easier I think they should be sorted or marked some how in the showthread template.

if vbulletin.org doesnt allow hacks for vb3.5 beta i will just create a hack site where people can submit hacks... simple put... who is to stop me.

this place is going down the crap hole and im sure im not the only one getting sick of it.

it should be up to the coder and the person installing the hack whether they feel like making or installing the hacks in the first place..

The same policy was here under the betas of 3.0

If you really thiung this place is going down the "crap hole" go suggest some ideas for us to make it better ? :)