How about mods having to meet some minimum standards....
 

before they can be listed on this site.

For one..... coders should be required to provide detailed uninstall directions for a mod before it is accepted here. Most of them do. A while back, I installed a mod called vBRadio, assuming that if I ever wanted to remove it, there would be no problem. Not the case. The vBRadio mod, and others from the same coder, do modifications to the database, templates, admincp, and hell knows what else. Trouble is, the mod doesn't show up in the product manager so you can't remove it that way. A look at the distribution package shows no uninstaller. OOPS! There is no list of what modifications the installer made to my vBulletin installation.

Can someone at vBulletin.org, at the very minimum, publish a set of guidelines for mods? It my save some poor dumbass like me a lot of trouble in the future.

Who is here to judge what the "standard" of a modification is?

posting a question as an answer to that same question is pointless Hanson... the guy is asking if the site could have some protocol...

and yes, this is a good question. the problem is that as there is no rule, nobody wants to apply any...

The problem I see with this is, any coder could provide uninstall directions which in turn could not work as they have described. To have a set standard on the mods that are released would almost mean that someone would have to take he time to install and test each modification.

With that said, your best bet when getting ready to use any modification is to test it on a test forum (thus why I believe vbulletin allows you to use two instances (so long as one is not viewable to the public). If and when your forum becomes substantial in size, would you risk the word of someone who is providing a modification free for download to work 100%) Personally, and nothing against any coder here, I would test it on a demo forum before allowing it to go on my live forums.

Good question but I'm not sure it's up to the mods / staff to determine the quality of a modification or set guidelines on what is included, in this case uninstall instructions.

As for "uninstall instructions" well reversing the order which you installed it would be the typical way, remove template edits if any, uninstall the plugin, delete the associated files. If you follow these steps and it left your DB with extra tables, then the modification wasn't written too well... and back to my original point that someone HERE would have had to have tested it to know it in fact did not work. Anyhow, not trying to be negative but shed some thought on why it might be a difficult task.

We have no intention to change our policy on modifications. We have a limited set of guidelines/rules in place, but we try to keep low requirements for sharing solutions with the rest of thecommunity. We could add a lot of (artificial) rules a modification must follow, but that will only lower the number of submitted modifications.

Some modifications are coded by experienced vB coders who will ensure that everything will run smooth in most situation, some others are simply a solution someone made for their own board and share it so others do not need reinvent it.

Using any third-party modification should always be done with a bit of care and if possible first tested on a testboard.

I personally disagree with the idea of mods having to meet some minimum standards due to the fact that even if these standards only are based on the coding and instructions given at first, nearly every site I've seen which has added a set of rules for submission has then basically used it to remove or ban content the moderators don't personally like, and with all due respects, I don't want to see moderators playing judge, jury and executioner with modifications like I've seen on a couple of other sites in other subject areas, especially with some of the more controversial submissions (aka, anything seen by some to be controversial or quick activity/content boosting would probably get banned if it went that far). The other reason is that only some mods need these instructions, things like BB code, or minor edits, or just product/plugin files really don't need a step by step list of instructions how to install or uninstall.

being a site for " fans " to share their own stuff is not supposed to be ruled by a big protocol... there is already one existing, when we build something to be a product/plugin ... just following this protocol is already good.

if vb.org become an official site for pros, yes it would require a protocol of approval and strict coding, but i don't think we need something like this in the vB community...

Well Marco .......... I guess that ends this conversation. Not everyone is into quality control I guess.

Attention all coders: Go ahead and post your hack job of a mod on this site. It's ok.


So vBulletin doesn't mind me running 2 copies of their script?

You are allowed to run a second copy in a test directory that is password protected from the public, for example though htaccess, or you may do as I do and use xampp and run it locally on your computer.

It specifically states in the license agreement that you can have a Production/Live installation and a Test/Development installation. In fact we encourage people to have a test/development installation so you can test out upgrades and addons without affecting your live site and causing issues that would adversely affect your community.

What are the requirements for "test/development" installations. Just needa be private?

You can read the requirements in the License Agreement

Agree.

There is a rating bar and the comment section available to every addon. These two ensure that users can share their experience regarding addons. I at least browse through the comments section and take a closer look at the last entries and also on the response rate of coders who marked "supported" = yes before I consider even downloading a addon.

We all have time limitations but addons whose coders never updated in month while there are nasty bugs reported are a no-go for me. Security and stability rule, rest drools. ;)

Testdriving on a non-productive server is not always an option because what seems to work or at lest doesn't harm can later show its real implications.

I trust in the opinion of other coders which "control" the source of other coder's addons.

Maybe you should actually do your research and not just install any random mod because it looks good. Rather than expecting everyone else to police the mods for your convenience. You do realise nobody here is paid for the work they release, right?

why everyone getting worked up - the guy asked a decent question.So instead of we dont plan on changing our policy try spend the same energy on finding solutions to problems.
Also seeing as this is a members board - maybe asking the members once in a while what they want may help instead of always telling us what we cant have.

For this, i would like to introduce to you the "Modification Requests (Unpaid)" forum... people suggest things they would like to see as addons/products...

sometimes, people are asking too much...

sometimes...

Look numnuts..... nobody asked everone else to police mods for my convenience. That was an idiotic response. All I said was that mods should adhere to a specific set of guidelines. WTF is wrong with that concept? It's callled QC and QA. That simply means, letting others know exactly what modification are being made when a mod is installed, and what is required to undo those modifications. It is not always just the reverse proceedure. Some of these coders obviously put a lot of hours into a given work and asking to put a reasonable effort into documentation is not, in my opinion, an unreasonable request.

FYI - I do read the entire mod thread, and I DO indeed do my own research, so you may can the attidude.


So what's your point? Are you saying that since something is available at no charge, it's ok to have serious flaws, and that people should just accept those serious flaws, and just shut up about them?? Anyone that actually believes that, should not post their work in the first place.

True they shouldn't be posting their work, but thats just the way it goes sometimes with people who are new to programming or just trying to get started. I agree there should be some QC, but there is no real way to implement it without someone viewing and auditing every single line of code thats here.

LOL Haven't heard that one for years. :D

Sometimes too many rules will cause users to not take that first step and post their first modification. They get too worried they are going to break a rule and get their mod pulled. So, it's better to gently lead them down the right path. If they did something 'wrong' in their modification, you send them a nice PM or make a post with suggestions on what to add next - "Sometimes new people unfamiliar with modifications will install a new mod and then decide they don't need it and go to uninstall it and don't understand how to do so correctly, especially when there are files uploaded. It's a really good idea to include uninstall instructions that detail exactly what to do for these newbies." Most coders what to do it right and being polite while pointing out a problem will be much more effective than adding a rule.

This is really not a viable discussion anymore. Mr. vBulletin has declared that they have no intention of doing anything differently, so that pretty much sums it up.

I was not suggesting that someone review every single line of code. That would be ridiculous. However..... why Mr. vBulletin rejected the suggestion of publishing a set of guidelines, escapes me at the moment. I did not mean guidelines to be a set of strict rules or else policy. I see nothing wrong with having a standard checklist describing what an addon does.

Foor instance:

Files uploaded: yes/no .... list of files
Files Modified: yes/no ..... list of files
Templates added: yes/no ..... list of templates
Templates Modified: yes/no ..... list
Database changes: yes/no ..... list of changes
Admin CP changes: yes/no ... list

Uninstall directions included: yes/no


etc, etc.....

You most likely have noticed that all the really good mod coders already do this. I just wish all of them would.

As a community we've tried to do similar things in the past and had long threads about it in the past.

Basically no one wants to manage the problem and a lot of coders don't want to adhere to the "standards" that would have been put in place for personal reasons.

In other words I doubt it'll ever happen. Your best bet it to use a test forum and only download/use modifications from respected hack authors.

A phrase about herding cats comes to mind.

If there is a serious flaw in a modification (such as an SQL injection vulnerability), please report that modification. Staff will look at that modification and quarantine it if necessary.

Probably because it's the sort of thing a 5 year old would say.

Hostility begets hostility. If you post in a demanding and hostile manner people will respond in kind.

And to the OP; Since I'd rather not incurr your terrible wrath and more name calling, I'll simply suggest you read everyone elses reply again, and maybe adjust your bad attitude and sense of entitlement :rolleyes:

I hope I don't get called a poopoo head or something now :|

Coders on vBulletin.org are not paid for their work, it is all done voluntarily. There are already not many people who submit work (I mean, there are quite a bit, but we could always have more). Setting up a list of guidelines that they must follow, will probably just make vB.org have less people releasing modifications.

If applied from the start, the rules would've been accepted and followed. Changing this just because of a couple of coders who can not code logically is just bad... like Mike said!