Hacks should be released in ONE ZIP file please
 

What if the hack only has one file? its kind of pointless when its only one file :-/

Well, most Hacks do consist of multiple files anyway.
And even if it is only one file ZIP saves Bandwidth :)

There are coding and other reasons for this too. :) It would be of great assistance if hackers could do this.

What if a hack has multiple versions available in the same thread ?

If a hack is just one xml plugin file this makes very little sense - it make the process slower for author and installer.

It would hardly make it slower, and has a lot of advantages. Maybe we should reconsider allowing multiple files if you have more then one version active.

One other advantage is that you would have some very basic chek if the download was not corrupted. (zip file would fail to open, with txt you will never know).

But the main reason is that most hacks come with more then 1 file (even if only a plugin and a description/instruction text file) and it would be much easier if a member can have them both together instead of in seperate files which could get confusing if you keep a lot of hacks stored somewhere that you have installed.

If it's just a single file then the end user now has to unzip a file they previously could just download and use - a longer process. Okay, I'll grant you it's not much longer and probably not worth worrying - but it is a longer process. :)

This is my main point - it doesn't make sense to zip up multiple versions into one zip - the end user only needs one of them. In my specific case I am referring to my Flashchat mods - there are multiple live versions because of the different versions of Flashchat in use.

I'll begin to ZIP all my hacks when i get the chance and update my all my hack threads. When you guys upgrad to 3.5. I think it would be nice to see how many downloads again. :)

That's one reason why we want it all in 1 file. There are other reasons to do with the proposed database and future features planned. :)

Excellent! :)

(This entire post was made under the assumption that Attachment Size Limit has not changed, or it is still too low for my points below to be valid, which I have not checked as of yet. If it has, please ignore this post)
I am sorry, but I am unable to comply with this rule for my RPG Integration Hack. It contains mass amounts of images, and even putting all images in 1 zip file would make it too large for the Attachment feature. And given that the next version of my hack will contain even MORE images, to be able to comply the limit must be increased to ~20 MB.
I have more than 400 images (some are very small but still), and as you can understand it would be impossible to work with an attachment limit below that.
The only other solution I have would be to offer the images as a download on the site Dan and I are making for the RPG project, but licence verification would be limited to a replica of the GeekyDesigns way (a post here with a hash inside a code block that would need to be input on the site), which creates hassle for the end-user.
I will watch this thread and my PM box for any updates on this :)


//peace

I agree that a hack with so many images and such a big size, would difficult with this rule. I think however that we will not "hard" enforce the 1 zip-file rule (see also the discussion on multiple versions above).

I think however that a hack that is larger then 2Mb would be a real exception around here.

i hate it, infact detest would be a better word when screenshots are zipped up (i don't care how many there are), but if it's only one file, zipping it is a nuisance especially as an end user, let alone as a hacker, but meh, your house, your rules :)

That's why Erwin wrote this part: "Screenshots can still be posted separately[...]"

Actually i think we should even add that we would like that the version number is in the name of the zipfile.

I do it like that for a long time already, and this will allow you to have more versions of the same hack in 1 directory, with having to rename the real files involved.

Actually this was one of teh arguments in the discussion we had before we made this request, but it seems we have forgotten about it.

Just to clarify - is this just for 3.5.0 hacks - many pre 350 hacks are just a single text file (certainly in my case).

This was triggered by the fact that lately a lot of vB3.5 hacks where leased consisiting of 1 or more text/xml files. But you can consider it a a general request.

As a leecher ...um ... i mean user, I can assure you that even if it's just one file, It's not much to extract it.

besides anything to zave bandwidth.

Also, I like to keep a library of all the hacks I've installed and when i install them I zip them right back up.

While I can minimally understand the zip request, I also find it rather irritating. Now you cannot even attach a txt file in a regular post because valid file extensions were changed to the following: bmp, gif, jpe, jpeg, jpg, png, zip.

It would seem that, as this site depends in part on hackers, TPTB would try to make it more, rather than less, convenient for hackers. For me personally, I might think twice about posting code or mods, given this new rule.

It's completely pointless for single files, and quite irritating to have to zip up a single text file (you can't attach php files to posts either, I abandoned an update the other day because of this, there seems to be an asumption that every machine has the ability to zip/unzip, which they don't). I couldn't even be bothered to complain as I know it's a waste of time.

It saves bandwidth. Please understand this, even if it's just a little we save, it's still something, and can accumulate with all the zips posted on all of the modification forums to a decent saving of bandwidth.

Zipping up is NOT a hard process. It's most likely going to be one right click. It will take you less than a minute. Absolutely nothing compared to the time coders spend on some of their modifications.

It does not always save more than a non-neglibile amount of bandwidth. See the attachment. If there is such a concern over bandwidth, get rid of the images and styles, and make this site similar to a text-only site.

No, it is not a hard process, but it is not always one click, and it is not always less than a minute. Especially for one file, it is a PITA extra nuisance step, one that you have heard deters at least a few vB hackers.

It's not a huge concern, but it's always better to save some where we can.

Hmm, I wonder if TPTB thought about surfing habits in relation to zip files. At least some members could regularly request zip files twice, to view the archive content and then to save, whereas a request for a txt, php, etcetera file might be made just once. So, for the sake of discussion, if a zip is say fifty percent compressed, two accesses saves you how much?

Okay, there are other reasons to do with the future database front-end and other tracking purposes why we require the attachment for hacks to be in ZIP format. I can't discuss this publically but we request this for a specific reason that we cannot fully disclose. But it is for a reason and not merely to upset people.

Why not just create and store the zips on the fly? See this for an example. That way TPTB get zips, and those hackers that are annoyed, especially with one file, do not have to zip.

For anyone interested -- here is a Windows GNU/LGPL zip application that also handles gzip, tar, deb, rpm, etc.

It is tested and working in *nix via WINE.

http://www.7-zip.org/

</offtopic>

It's an IMPOSSIBLE process if you don't have the software on a machine. Bandwidth should be of no concern to a site this size, if you are on a hosting package where it is then you are on the wrong package. Cricky, even our site, which is on it's own server, has some ridiculous figure like 2000GB a month ! Any decent higher package would be a fixed speed, unlimited bandwidth.

Thank you, now we are getting somewhere instead of answers that make little sense. :)

I am confused why a zip compression tool is such a concern. There are a host of free ones out there.

For Macs:

http://www.maczipit.com/

http://www.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/

http://www.macwindows.com/compress.html

For *nix:

http://www.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/

I'm sure there are, that's not the point. Have you considered that I may not want (or be permitted) to install then on some pc's (like compay machines) ?

Paul, I appreciate that -- but if this will be a forum requirement because of the new system they are building, I think offering alternatives to how to work within it may help. :)

Bandwidth is NOT the issue. vb.org already has gzip emabled on the server pages. so using zip files is the same as text files in terms of bandwidth.

Sigh, that's another one of those "don't ask" decisions from the top.

I really hope it's a really good reason, and the reason has to be secret, and us cattle users should not know anything about it. It's at least less insulting than the "malicious developers" reason from the other thread.

This is really not the way to build and lead a successful community, and the more of these surprise "secret" reasons for decisions you keep coming up with does not bode well for the forum, and the efforts people have to put in for the privilige of sharing their work here.

Licensing is vb.com's responsibility and the more you want to squeze and burden honest members for the sake of possibly spotting a couple of bad apples here and there is not worth ruining this forum for the rest. The more you keep doing these things, the more need there will be for an alternate place, and if that happens, you'd even lose the ability to request simply entering a license #. So please stop it already, it's really getting sick.

This isn't a really valid argument in 2005...

Microsoft Windows has had inherent ZIP file format for both compression and decompression since Windows 98SE. It is a standard feature in all Windows computers sold today.

All Unix/Linux based Operating Systems (including the Macintosh OS X Series) install TAR which can decompress and compress ZIP encoded files as well as TARBALLS. Beyond that each of them also comes with GZIP which is a comparable utility.

I have not needed to install a ZIP utility on my computer for the last five years no matter what operating system is installed. They have become standard utilities.

If by some off chance your company computers do not have these utilities and having one installed is vital to your work then I am sure network services can easily install one for you. If it is not necessary for your work at said company, then you most likely shouldn't be modifying vBulletin at work. If your OS is so old that it doesn't have these capabilities then you should really look into upgrading.

Yes, you can say it adds an extra burden on you but do not try to make up invalid excuses.

Wow, I'm sure you guys think this makes perfect sense....

If their company (I guess they have to have Windows, and must install zip) etc. etc. or one shouldn't be using company computer (even at lunch time) ....

This is the pitfall of deciding for eveyone in secrecy and then thinking of excuses why it should work for everyone.

But they don't have to install anything... Windows computers support ZIP files by default.

Not making excuses for anything. Nothing has been decided for secrecy. Having a standard file format instead of 10 different compression routines or other file formats is a common sense decision. Has nothing to do with Jelsoft's policies.

Why do you assume all companies must have Windows? Most of my emplyers run Ultrix or HP-UX, and some run Solaris.

You mean like the site making up invalid excuses about bandwidth ..... "people in glass houses" springs to mind.

I don't... Those OSes ship with utilities that are capable of Zipping and Unzipping multiple files as well.

I specifically mentioned Windows in my post because you did. I can ZIP and Unzip files on my webserver which isn't windows based and there was no additional software installed.

As stated above, bandwidth is only one consideration. However for anyone running a website, bandwidth is your primary expense and should always be looked. Someone above said that Jelsoft should be able to get by with 2000 GB of bandwidth a month, that just isn't happening. This site is not on its own server. It shares a server with vBulletin.com which has humongous bandwidth demands with the thousands of emails and vBulletin downloads it has every day.

omg people if they only allow .zips then people can only upload zips arguing about it wont change the fact. 99.98% of the os installs out there will have support for zips in 1 form or another. there are also php programs that will zip files and unzip files for you. stop being so pigheaded. they could have said all programs have to have their own installer in an executable format(exe). now that would have gone against many. but zip is universal.
also i dont know of any company that likes you to work on other projects at work other than what your assigned to do.
last time i checked solaris had zip compression in for along time(unix has it built in longer than windows/mac OSX). dont be an obstructionist just because your panties get pulled up under a wegie. if you could make some valid points then it would suite you case much better. the way it sounds to me you are just some bratty teenagers throwing a tantrum because your not getting your way

oh btw keep up the good work vb-team(org/com)

The alternative is to allow single text or php files. :) Perhaps they should have been more open about this "request" in the first place, We still don't really know why it's a requirement of the "new system". (It's not really even a request is it, since the ability to do anything else has been removed, it's really a "you have no choice" order).